Skip to main content

Full text of "Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society"

See other formats











■ _*^ 

v i 

I :g->" 

&*' >»* - J 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



(Eomtnittee of Publication. 




wacjrasetis Historical Sbcietg. 

Vol. I. — Second Series. 


^ubltsljetf at tfje <£fjarge of tfje ^eaboUg JFunK. 



University Press: 
John Wilson and Son, Cambridge. 


With this volume begins a new Series of the Pro- 
ceedings ; and a comparison with those immediately 
preceding it will show that it is improved in its typo- 
graphical appearance, and presents a more attractive 
page. It contains no record of any meeting in Sep- 
tember, as in former years, — the Council having 
determined that this month should be included in the 
summer vacation, which extended from the beginning 
of July to October. 

In addition to the papers which have been presented 
at stated meetings of the Society, there will be found 
here six Memoirs. That of the Kev. William Newell, 
D.D., has been written by Dr. Clarke ; that of Horatio 
G. Somerby, by Mr. Appleton ; that of George Dexter, 
by Mr. C. C. Smith ; those of the Hon. Eichard Froth- 
ingham, LL.D., and Samuel F. Haven, LL.D., by Mr. 
Deane ; and that of Charles W. Tuttle, Ph.D., by Mr. 
Slafter. Accompanying these biographies are five por- 
traits. The engraved likeness of Mr. Frothingham has 
been given by Mrs. Frothingham; the heliotypes of 
Mr. Dexter and Mr. Haven have been kindly furnished 
by their families; and that of Mr. Somerby is also a 
gift to the Society. 


Inasmuch as some exceptions have been taken to cer- 
tain statements which have appeared in former volumes 
of the Proceedings, it seems necessary to say that, in 
publishing the views of its various members, the Society 
does not thereby approve them. Different and even 
contradictory opinions may be brought forward in rela- 
tion to the same subject at the same or any subsequent 
meeting ; and these will always be printed, without 
attempting to decide between them. It should be 
distinctly understood that neither the Committee of 
Publication nor the Society assumes any responsibility 
for the communications which are read, or the senti- 
ments which are set forth, or the phraseology which 
is used by the several writers, but that each individ- 
ual is alone accountable for the judgments which he 
makes, and for the language and style which he 

Since the last meeting which is reported in this book, 
the honored President of the Society has reiterated his 
desire to be released from further official duty. Hav- 
ing filled the office which he has held for thirty years 
with pre-eminent ability and fidelity, the members are 
deeply sensible of the serious loss which they have sus- 
tained by his withdrawal, and of their great indebtedness 
to him. For a whole generation he has contributed, in 
no small degree, to give the Society its position at 
home, and to secure for it respect and honor abroad; 
and every volume of its Proceedings during his long 
term of service bears witness to his devotion to its inter- 
ests. This is not the place to speak at length with 
reference to an event which is second to none that has 
occurred in the history of the Society ; but it is a satis- 


faction to know that, though we are no longer to have 
Mr. Winthrop for our President, lie will still remain with 
us as a member, and that we may entertain the hope 
that a long time will elapse before his name shall cease' 
to adorn our Resident roll. 

" Sic habites terras ! sic te desideret aether ! 
Sic ad pacta tibi sidera tardus eas ! " 


Cambridge, March 27, 1885. 



Preface v 

List of Illustrations xv 

Officers elected April, 1884 -xvii 

Resident Members xviii 

Honorary and Corresponding Members xx 

Members deceased xxii 


Remarks by the President, transmitting a relic of Mumbet to 
the Society, and announcing the death of M. Henri Martin 

and Mr. George Dexter 1 

Tribute to Mr. Dexter by Winslow Warren 7 

Tribute by Henry W. Foote 9 

Tribute by Charles C. Smith 12 

Medals in honor of Luther, mentioned by William S. Appleton ] 3 
Poem by Chief Justice Sewall, communicated by Samuel A. 

Green 13 

Contemporary copy of Dr. Benjamin Church's account of his trial 

in 1775, mentioned by Justin Winsor 14 

American Patriotism on the Sea, by Arthur B. Ellis . . . 15 

Origin of the American Flag, by George H. Preble ... 28 

Picture of John Randolph, given by Thomas W. Higginson . 30 




Remarks by the President on presenting various gifts to the 

Cabinet and Library 31 

Memorial Tribute to Miss Eliza S. Quincy by Josiah P. 

Quincy 34 

Remarks respecting Mum Bet, by Edward J. Young. ... 41 
Description of Peter Faneuil, and Notes on the Earliest Teaching 

of Medicine in Massachusetts, by Samuel A. Green . . 42 

Clinton's Secret Journal, by Thomas C. Amort 47 

Letters read by the President 64 

Tiie Witch-Trials in Salem in 1692 further considered, by Abner 

C. Goodell, Jr. 65 

Memoir of the Rev. William Newell, D.D., by James Freeman 

Clarke 72 


Remarks by the President 75 

Letter from David Cobb, contributed by Samuel C. Cobb . . 76 
History of Witchcraft in Massachusetts and the Act of 1711, 

discussed by George H. Moore 77 

Rejoinder to the foregoing, by Abner C. Goodell, Jr. . . . 99 

Correspondence of John Haynes and Fitz-John Winthrop, com- 
municated by Robert C. Winthrop, Jr. . . . . . . 118 

Memoir of Horatio G. Somerby, by William S. Appleton . . 132 


Eulogy on M. Mignet, and notice of Dr. Langdon-Elwyn, by the 

President 139 

Abstract of Marshall's Diary, by Charles F. Adams, Jr. . . 148 
Diary of Governor Hutchinson, and Edward Everett's connection 

therewith, by William Everett 164 

The Publication of Governor Hutchinson's " Conversation with 

the King," by Charles Deane . 166 

Committee to publish the Proceedings 168 

Report of the Council . 168 



Report of the Librarian 171 

Report of the Cabinet-keeper 173 

Report of the Treasurer 173 

Committee on the Sewall Correspondence 180 

Officers elected 180 


Charles Robinson and John Brown delineated, by Amos A. 

Lawrence 181 

Statue of John Harvard, by George E. Ellis 183 

Deed of Mrs. Ann Hibbins, presented by Josiah P. Quinct . 186 
Documents relating to the expeditions of Captain Samuel Argall, 

communicated by Charles Deane 187 

The Title "Colony" and "Province" as applied to Massachu- 
setts, by Abner C. Goodell, Jr 192 


Bequest of the late Williams Latham 200 

Remarks by the President, explaining the unofficial mission to 

Europe which was offered to himself and others in 1861 . 200 
Early Map of Eastern Massachusetts with Marginal Notes by 

Governor Winthrop, exhibited and described by Mellen 

Chamberlain . 211 

Governor Winthrop's Chart of 1630, by William P. Upham . 214 
John Brown of Osawatomie, by James Freeman Clarke . .216 

Statue of John Harvard, by Charles Deane 219 

Commission for the trial of Manioosin, an Indian, submitted by 

Abner C. Goodell, Jr 220 


Remarks by the President in acknowledgment of gifts, and 

Tribute to the Hon. Stephen Salisbury 223 

Letter from the Hon. James Russell Lowell to the Recording 

Secretary 228 



The " Hungry March," by Samuel A. Green 229 

Samuel Maverick's Account of New England iu 1630, contributed 

by John T. Hassam 231 

Price's View of Boston, in the British Museum, by Charles C. 

Smith 249 

Gifts to the Society 250 

Military Companies in Boston before the Revolutionary War, 

communicated by Edward J. Young 250 


Remarks by George E. Ellis, announcing the death of Mr. 

Ellis Ames and a new volume by Francis Parkman, and 

transmitting a Washington plate to the Society 252 

Inscriptions on the Monument to Nathaniel Sylvester, and on the 

Base of the Statue of John Harvard, by Robert C. Win- 

throp, Jr 256 

The Character and Services of Alexandre Vattemare, by Josiah 

P. Quincy 260 

The alleged Signing of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 

1776, by Mellen Chamberlain 272 

Groton during Shays's Rebellion, by Samuel A. Green . . . 298 
The Abode of John Hull and Samuel Sewall, by Estes Howe, 

introduced by Arthur B. Ellis 312 

Memoir of George Dexter, A.M., by Charles C Smith . . . 327 


Instructions of the Town of Maiden to their Representative in 
the General Court of Massachusetts in 1776, communicated 
by George S. Hale 335 

Letter from Sir William Phips and other Papers relating to 
Witchcraft, including Questions to Ministers and their An- 
swers, contributed by Abner C. Goodell, Jr 339 

Announcement of a volume of Trumbull Papers, by Charles 

Deane 359 




Valuable gift by Francis Parkman 3 GO 

Remarks by the President in regard to the Commemoration of 
the Fourth Centennial of the Discovery of America by Co- 
lumbus 362 

Samuel Maverick's Palisade House of 1630, by Mellen Cham- 
berlain 366 

Tributes to George W. Blagden, D.D., by Andrew P. Pea- 
body and Lucius R. Paige 373 


Gifts to the Library through Oliver Wendell Holmes . . . 374 
The Naval Battle between the " Chesapeake " and the " Shannon" 

described by Captain Nathaniel Spooner 374 

Remarks concerning the battle, by George H. Preble . . . 376 

Letters of Katharine Winthrop, from Robert C. Winthrop, Jr. 379 

Song for a Class Supper, by Ralph "Waldo Emerson .... 379 
Manuscripts relating to John Brown, presented by Amos A. 

Lawrence 379 

Memoir of the Hon. Richard Frothingham, LL.D., by Charles 

Deane 381 

Memoir of Samuel F. Haven, LL.D., by Charles Deane . . 394 
Memoir of Charles Wesley Tuttle, Ph.D., by Edmund F. 

Slafter c 406 

List of Donors to the Library 413 

Index 417 



Portrait of Richard Frothingham ..... Frontispiece 

Portrait of Horatio G. Somerby 132 

Portrait of George Dexter .......... 327 

Portrait of Samuel F. Haven . . . . 394 

Portrait of Charles W. Tuttle . . . . 406 




Elected April 10, 1884. 

|) resident. 

Rev. GEORGE E. ELLIS, D.D., LL.D Boston. 


|lecorbmg Hecretarg. 
Rev. EDWARD J. YOUNG, A.M Cambridge. 

Corresponbmg Hecreiarg. 

JUSTIN WINSOR, A.B. . Cambridge. 

CHARLES C. SMITH, Esq. Boston. 

Hon. SAMUEL A. GREEN, M.D Boston. 

Cabinet- jumper. 

fecuiibe Committee of tlje Council. 

CHARLES F. ADAMS, Jr., A.B , . . . Quincy. 



Hon. SAMUEL C. COBB Boston. 





Hon. Robert C. Winthrop, LL.D. 
Hon. Charles Francis Adams, LL.D. 
Rev. George E. Ellis, LL.D. 
Hon. PelegW. Chandler, LL.D. 
Rev. Lucius R. Paige, D.D. 
John "Langdon Sibley, A.M. 
Henry Wheatland, M.D. 
Charles Deane, LL.D. 
Francis Parkman, LL.B. 
Rev. Samuel K. Lothrop, D.D. 
Oliver Wendell Holmes, LL.D. 
Henry Austin Whitney, A.M. 
Leverett Saltonstall, A.M. 
Henry W T . Torrey, LL.D. 
Rev. Robert C. Waterston, A.M. 
Thomas C Amory, A.M. 
Hon. Samuel A. Green, M.D. 
Hon. James M. Robbins. 
Charles Eliot Norton, Litt.D. 
Hon. John J. Babson. 
Robert Bennett Forbes, Esq. 
Rev. Edward E. Hale, D.D. 
Rev. Andrew P. Peabody, LL.D. 
Hon. Horace Gray, LL.D. 
Amos A. Lawrence, A.M. 
Rev. Edwards A. Park, D.D. 
Hon. Francis E. Parker, LL.B. 
William II. Whitmore, A.M. 
Hon. James Russell Lowell, D.C.L. 

Rev. Nicholas Hoppin, D.D. 
Hon. William C. Endicott, LL.D. 
Hon. E. Rockwood Hoar, LL.D. 
Josiah P. Quincy, A.M. 
Samuel Eliot, LL.D. 
Henry G. Denny, A.M. 
Charles C. Smith, Esq. 
Hon. George S. Hale, A.B. 
William S. Appleton, A.M. 
Rev. Henry M. Dexter, D.D. 
Hon. Theodore Lyman, S.B. 
Abner C. Goodell, Jr., A.M. 
William Amory, A.M. 
Edward D. Harris, Esq. 
Augustus T. Perkins, A.M. 
Hon. Mellen Chamberlain, LL.B. 
Winslow Warren, LL.B. 
Francis W. Palfrey, A.M. 
Charles W. Eliot, LL.D. 
Rev. Henry W. Foote, A.M. 
Charles C. Perkins, A.M. 
Charles F. Dunbar, A.B. 
Hon. Charles Devens, LL.D. 
Charles F. Adams, Jr., A.B. 
William P. Upham, A.B. 
Fitch Edward Oliver, M.D. 
William Everett, Ph.D. 
George B. Chase, A.M. 
Henry Cabot Lodge, Ph.D. 



John T. Morse, Jr., A.B. 
Justin Winsor, A.B. 
J. Elliot Cabot, LL.B. 
Henry Lee, A.M. 
Gamaliel Bradford, A.B. 
Rev. Edward J. Young, A.M. 
Hon. John Lowell, LL.D. 
Abbott Lawrence, A.M. 
Rev. James Freeman Clarke, D.D. 
Rev. Phillips Brooks, D.D. 
William W. Greenough, A.B. 
Robert C. Winthrop, Jr., A.M. 
Henry W. Haynes, A.M. 
Thomas W. Higginson, A.M. 
Rev. Edward G. Porter, A.M. 
John C. Ropes, LL.B. 
Rev. Henry F. Jenks, A.M. 
Hon. Samuel C. Cobb. 
Horace E. Scudder, A.M. 
Rev. Edmund F. Slafter, A.M. 

Stephen Salisbury, A.M. 
John T. Hassam, A.M. 
Rev. Alexander McKenzie, D.D. 
Arthur Lord, A.B. 
Arthur B. Ellis, LL.B. 
Hon. Henry Morris, LL.D. 
Clement Hugh Hill, A.M. 
Frederick W. Putnam, A.M. 
James M. Bugbee, Esq. 
Hon. John D. Washburn, LL.B. 
Rev. Egbert C. Smyth, D.D. 
Francis A. Walker, LL.D. 
Rev. Arthur L. Perry, LL.D. 
Hon. John E. Sanford, A.M. 
Uriel H. Crocker, LL.B. 
Hon. Martin Brimmer, A.B. 
Roger Wolcott, LL.B. 
William G. Russell, LL D. 
Edward J. Lowell, A.M. 
Edward Channing, Ph.D. 



John Winthrop, Esq. 

Rt. Rev. William B. Stevens, D. 

E. George Squier, Esq. 

Hon. George Bancroft, D.C.L. 

J. Hammond Trumbull, LL.D. 

James Riker, Esq. 

Henry Stevens, F.S.A. 
Frederick Griffin, Esq. 
Rev. Wm. S. South gate, A.M. 
John Gilmary Shea, LL.D. 
Hon. John R. Bartlett, A.M. 



Leopold von Ranke. 
James Anthony Froude, M.A. 
Edward A. Freeman, D.C L. 
Rt. Rev. Lord A. C. Hervey, D.D. 
Rev. Theodore D. Woolsey, D.I). 
David Masson, LL D. 
Baron F. von Holtzendorfr. 
S.A.R. le comte de Paris, 

Rt. Rev. William Stubbs, D.D. 
Hon. William M. Evarts, LL.D. 
Hon. Horatio Seymour, LL.D. 
Theodor Mommsen. 
M. le marquis de Rochambeau. 
Hon. Elihu B. Washburne. 
John R. Seeley, LL.D. 
William E. H. Lecky, LL.D. 



Benjamin F. French, Esq. 

Hon. William H. Trescot. 

J. Carson Brevoort, LL.D. 

George H. Moore, LL.D. 

W. Noel Sainsbury, Esq. 

S. Austin Allibone, LL.D. 

Henry T. Parker, A.M. 

Benson J. Lossing, LL.D. 

Lyman C. Draper, LL.D. 

Rev. William G. Eliot, D.D, 

Henry B. Dawson, Esq. 

Goldwin Smith, D.C.L. 

George Ticknor Curtis, A.B. 

Hon. John Meredith Read, A.M. 
Joseph Jackson Howard, LL.D. 

Richard Henry Major, F.S.A. 
Rev. Edmond de Pressense, D.D. 
Charles J. Stille, LL.D. 
William W. Story, A.M. 
M. Jules Marcou. 
Thomas B. Akins, D.C.L. 
M. Pierre Margry. 
Charles J. Hoadly, A.M. 
John Foster Kirk, Esq. 
Benjamin Scott, F.R.A.S. 
Hon. Charles H. Bell, LL.D. 
Rev. Edward D. Neill, A.B. 
William Gammell, LL.D. 
Rev. Thomas Hill, LL.D. 
Hon. Manning F. Force, LL.B. 
Sir Bernard Burke, C.B., LL.D. 
Samuel Rawson Gardiner, LL.D. 
Hon. John Bigelow, A.B. 

George William Curtis, LL.D. 

Henry C. Lea, Esq. 

Hubert H. Bancroft, A.M. 

Rev. Richard S. Storrs, LL.D. 

M. Gustave Yapereau. 

William F. Poole, LL.D. 

Rev. E. Edwards Beardsley, D.D. 

John Austin Stevens, A.B. 

Joseph F. Loubat, LL.D. 

Charles H. Hart, LL.B. 

Rev. Moses Coit Tyler, LL.D. 

Hermann von Hoist, Ph.D. 

Franklin B. Dexter, A.M. 

John M. Brown, A.M. 

Hon. Andrew D. White, LL.D. 

Prof. George W. Ranck. 

James M. Le Moine, Esq. 

Rt. Hon. George O. Trevelyan, LL.D. 

Henry Adams, A.B. 

Julius Dexter, A.B. 

Rev. Henry M. Baird, D.D. 

Gen. Henry B. Carrington, U.S.A. 

Hon. William Wirt Henry. 

M. le vicomte d'Haussonville. 

William F. Allen, A.M. 

James Bryce, D.C.L. 

Rev. Charles R. Weld, B.D. 

Herbert B. Adams, Ph.D. 

Signor Cornelio Desimoni. 

Gen. George W. Cullum, U.S.A. 

Hon. J. L. M. Curry, LL.D. 

Amos Perry, A.M. 



Members who have died since the last volume of the Proceedings 
was issued, March 28, 1884. 


Hon. Stephen Salisbury, LL.D. 
Ellis Ames, A.B. 

John C. Phillips, A.B. 

Rear- Admiral Geo. H. Preble, U.S.N. 

Honorary and Corresponding. 

M. Francois A. M. Mignet. 
Alfred Langdon-Elwyn, M.D. 

Rev. William Barry, D.D. 
Rev. George W. Blagden, D.D. 





THE first meeting of the new year was held in the Dowse 
Library, on Thursday, the 10th instant, at 3 P.M. ; the 
Hon. Robert C. Winthrop, the President, occupying the 

The Recording Secretary read his report of the last meet- 
ing, which was accepted. 

The Librarian announced the donations to the Library dur- 
ing the previous month. 

The President then said : — 

The New Year opens for us, Gentlemen, not altogether with- 
out clouds, but with renewed cause for gratitude to God for 
the general prosperity we have enjoyed. Ninety years are 
now completed since our Act of Incorporation was accepted ; 
ninety-three years since our Society was formally organized ; 
and ni-Uety-four years since those first nebulous meetings of 
the original five founders, who, having added five more to their 
number, proceeded to institute the first Historical Society in 
the United States. 

It will be time enough, when our Centennial shall arrive, 
six years hence, to review the rise and progress of our own 
Society and of the numberless kindred associations, in all parts 
of our country, which have sprung up under our example. 

Nor will I detain you, this afternoon, with any detailed ac- 
count of what has been accomplished by us during the past 


year. Such an account belongs peculiarly to our Annual 
Meeting in April, and may well be reserved for that occasion. 
Meantime, one or two New Year's gifts for the Society have 
reached me within a few days, under circumstances and with 
associations of more than common interest, and to which I will 
first call your attention. 

It may perhaps be remembered that, just as our last meeting 
was coming to its close, on the 12th of December, I alluded to 
a letter which I had received from the Rev. Edwin M. Stone, 
formerly of Beverly, Massachusetts, and the historian of that 
town, but more recently of Providence, Rhode Island. The 
letter was written by an amanuensis, and stated that he was 
very ill, but that he desired to present to this Society, in recog- 
nition of courtesies received from it, a copy of his new volume, 
just published, entitled u Our French Allies." The volume 
reached me only yesterday, accompanied by a copy for myself. 
It is an elaborate work, of more than six hundred pages, with 
a great number of interesting portraits and illustrations, giving 
a detailed account of the French officers and soldiers who 
came over to our assistance in our struggle for Independence, 
and of many of the American officers and soldiers who were 
associated with them during the last years of the War of the 
Revolution, and more particularly of the Rhode Island officers. 
It concludes with an account of the great commemoration at 
Yorktown three years ago. 

The volume is an interesting and valuable contribution to 
the history of the French alliance, and we should all have been 
glad to return our grateful acknowledgments to the author for 
so acceptable an addition to our Library. But the illness from 
which he was suffering proved to be fatal, and Mr. Stone died 
at Providence on the 15th of December, three days only after 
our meeting, in the seventy-eighth year of his age. He was a 
native of Massachusetts, a worthy and excellent man, and an 
earnest worker in the field of American history. I have a 
melancholy satisfaction in fulfilling his request by laying on 
the table this last and most cherished work of his life. 

Another gift to our Society has reached me within a few 
days past, which has many interesting and touching associa- 
tions. It comes from William Minot, Esq., the son of our late 
Resident Member of the same name, and the grandson of one 
of our most eminent founders, George Richards Minot. I can 


describe the gift in no language so appropriate as that of the 
letter which accompanied it. 

39 Court Street, Jan. 2, 1884. 

Dear Mr. Winthrop, — Soon after the passage of our State Bill of 
Rio-hts in 1783, an African female slave, by the name of Mumbet, was 
emancipated in Sheffield by process of law, brought to '>. final judgment 
in her favor by Mr. Theodore Sedgwick. 

Mumbet subsequently entered Mr. Sedgwick's service as his children's 
nurse, and died in his home in Stockbridge, greatly respected and 
beloved by his family. 

She was in the habit of wearing a necklace of gold beads, and just 
before her death she gave this necklace to Miss Catherine M. Sedgwick, 
the youngest daughter of Judge Sedgwick. Miss Sedgwick valued it 
highly, and had the beads formed into a bracelet as more convenient 
for her own wear. At her death she gave the bracelet to her niece, my 
wife, who in turn left it to my daughter, .lately deceased. 

There can be no doubt of its genuineness, and it is a curious and 
interesting relic as having belonged to the first slave ever emancipated 
by process of law in Massachusetts, if not in the United States. 

By an accident, some of the beads were lost. To preserve those 
remaining, I have had them reunited, whence the smallness of the 
bracelet as it now is. As a relic, valuable for its associations, it 
marks so striking an epoch in our social and political progress, that I 
thought it might be worthy of a place in the Cabinet of the Massachu- 
setts Historical Society. If you agree with me, will you be so kind 
as to request the Society to become the custodian of it ? 

Very sincerely yours, 

Wm. Minot. 
Hon. Robert C. Winthrop. 

This little relic thus comes to our Cabinet, associated not 
only with the memories of Theodore Sedgwick, the old Speaker 
and Senator in Congress and a Judge of the Supreme Court of 
Massachusetts, and of his daughter, Miss Catherine Sedgwick, 
the accomplished authoress, and of other members of their 
family more recently and sadly deceased, but with the humble 
African servant, greatly respected and beloved by that family, 
who is believed to have been the very first subject of emanci- 
pation under the Massachusetts Bill of Rights in 1783. I 
am sure you will all desire to offer a grateful acknowledg- 
ment to Mr. Minot, and I venture to offer the following 
Resolution: — 


Resolved, That the thanks of this Society be returned to 
William Minot, Esq., for the very interesting relic which he 
has presented for our Cabinet, and that we shall gladly give it 
a place among our most precious memorials. 

I turn now, Gentlemen, to still more serious topics. 

The deatli'of M. Henri Martin, on the 14th of December last, 
takes another distinguished name from our Foreign Honorary 
Roll. He has followed his contemporary and friend, M. de 
Laboulaye, after a brief interval. 

M. Martin was well known, on both sides of the Atlantic, as 
the author of an elaborate and voluminous History of France, 
from the most remote period almost to the present day. Its 
last chapter includes the accession of M. Gambetta to the chief 
place in the French Ministry, less than three years ago. This 
work, as originally published, secured for its author the great 
Gobert Prize, " for the most eloquent page or chapter of 
French history," from the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles- 
Lettres and the Institute of France. Many portions of the 
work have been translated into English by Miss Mary L. Booth 
and others, and have been published in our own city, — the 
last three volumes, with copious and costly illustrations, by 
Estes & Lauriat. 

M. Martin was a member of the Institute and a Senator of 
France. Like Laboulaye, he was an ardent Republican, and 
evinced a deep interest in the success of the Union cause during 
our late civil war. He was a member of the Commission for 
presenting to the United States the gigantic statue of "Liberty 
enlightening the World," and most kindly accompanied M. 
Bartholdi in conducting me to see that marvellous work when 
I was in Paris in October, 1882. I had met him many years 
before at the table of our associate, Mr. Charles C. Perkins, 
who will bear witness with me to his great interest in our 
country and its institutions. 

An excellent portrait of M. Martin will be found in the 
January number of the New York "Century," in connection 
with an interesting article on "The Forty Immortals," of 
which he was one. "Henri Martin," says that article, "stands 
next to Mignet. This good man has rehabilitated the Druids, 
erected an altar to Joan of Arc, and shown the Revolution 
to be the triumph of the equality-loving Celt over the Frank 


and his feudal system." " Henri Martin," the article goes 
on to say, "is in his seventy-third year. He has a tall, strong- 
boned, loose-made, stooping figure, and a serious face which 
easily lights up into smiles and expresses pleasure — mental or 
moral — in blushing cheeks. His inner man lives in the most 
transparent of glass houses. Though a well of erudition, he 
keeps the freshness of childhood. It delights him to oblige. 
His conversation, when he is set talking on a subject in which 
he is at home, is an instructive and delightful essay. . . . 
Though tolerant of every belief, or unbelief, he groans when 
he sees materialist articles in the scientific columns of the 
Republican papers. His grandchildren are nourished with 
works of Unitarian piety. One of his two children — a daugh- 
ter — was the delight of his eyes and pride of his heart. She 
grew up in beauty, and cultivated, under Ary Scheffer, a 
genius for painting. On the day on which she had achieved 
an artistic triumph and was engaged to be married, she 
died. Henri Martin clings to the old belief in the soul's 

The writer was mistaken in speaking of him as " standing 
next " to Mignet on the rolls of the Academy. Mignet's elec- 
tion dates from 1886, while Martin succeeded Thiers in 1878. 
But I can add nothing to a sketch so vivid, written while he 
was yet living, and evidently by one who knew him well. 
Another year had been added to his life before it ended. He 
was but nine months younger than myself, having been born 
on the 20th of February, 1810. I recall the emphatic eager- 
ness with which he took off his hat and saluted me, on learn- 
ing that I was his senior. 

The journals have stated that a public funeral was proposed 
for him by the Government of France, but that it was found 
that he had expressly prohibited such a ceremonial by his will, 
and had requested that the amount which it would have cost 
should be given to the poor. 

He was elected an Honorary Member of this Society in 
October, 1878, the year of the centennial anniversary of that 
French alliance which resulted in Yorktown and the Treaty of 
Peace and Independence. 

We can notice, Gentlemen, without emotion, the loss from our 
Foreign Honorary Roll of the name, however distinguished, 


of one who has died at a good old age, having finished his 
labors and won his laurels, and for whom little remained but 
the infirmities of advancing years; but the loss of which 
we arc specially reminded to-day, comes home to all our 
hearts, and cannot be announced without sincere sorrow. 

Mr. George Dexter was elected a Resident Member of 
this Society in October, 1877. His close relations with one 
of our oldest and most valuable associates and officers, who 
has the warm sympathies of us all, had already prepared him 
for entering at once and heartily into our service, and, at the 
Annual Meeting immediately following his admission as a 
member, he was installed as our Recording Secretary. 

It has happened to me during my long service in this chair 
— I hardly dare remember how long it has been — to be 
associated with many Recording Secretaries, — the excellent 
Chandler Robbins, the devoted Charles Deane, the genial 
and delightful Edmund Quincy, — not to name the occasional 
Secretaries pro tern, who have so obligingly taken the place 
in emergencies occasioned by absence or ill-health. I have 
owed them all many kind attentions and much valuable assist- 
ance. But it is no disparagement to either of them for me to 
say, that we had found in Mr. Dexter a man singularly and 
eminently adapted to our work, and that, during the few 
years in which he has been spared to our service, he has more 
than fulfilled our highest expectations, and has shown himself 
a model secretary for all who may follow him. 

His labors, T need not say, have been by no means confined 
to the keeping of our records or the printing of our Proceed- 
ings. He has been one of the most constant contributors to 
those Proceedings, and has never been weary in bringing forth 
from our own archives, or from other sources at his command, 
interesting and valuable papers, which he has rendered more 
interesting and more valuable by his careful explanations and 
annotations. Tutor Sever's Argument ; Governor Pownall ; 
the Letters of Dr. Andrew Eliot ; the Journals of Thomas 
Wallcut and Charles Turner ; the First Voyage under Sir 
Humphrey Gilbert's Patent; Governor Hutchinson's Letters 
from the Public Record Office; the Old Record-Book of the 
Suffolk Bar ; Dr. Belknap's Journal of a Visit to the Oneida 
Indians; Henry Wheaton's Letters; a Letter to Wheaton 
from Erasmus Rask on the Northmen ; the Letters of Colum- 


bus and Vespucius, — such are the varied subjects of his suc- 
cessive communications. The two last-named of them called 
into play his exceptional accomplishments as a modern linguist, 
which were often turned to valuable account in our service. 
When we remember that he was only associated with us for 
five or six years, and that a considerable part of this period 
was doomed to be spent in foreign lands or in a remote region 
of his own land, we may well feel that he had made the very 
most of his time in contributing to the volumes of which he 
was, also, the principal Editor. 

Amiable, intelligent, accomplished, a graduate of Harvard 
University, of which he was for a time a tutor and a pupil of 
her Law School, an earnest member of the Church with which 
he was associated, his tastes, studies, and acquirements gave 
promise of rich fruit in years to come ; and nothing seemed 
wanting but health to insure for him a distinguished place in 
historical pursuits and literature. But, alas ! he early mani- 
fested pulmonary weakness, and has fallen a victim to con- 
sumption while still in the prime of life. He left us for Santa 
Barbara, California, last autumn, and died there, to the great 
sorrow of us all, on the 18th of December. 

There are some of his contemporaries and classmates who 
may desire to pay tributes to his memory, and I leave it to 
them to do ampler justice to his character. 

Meantime, I am instructed by the Council to submit the 
following Resolutions : — 

Resolved, That in the lamented death of our associate and 
late Recording Secretary, George Dexter, this Society has lost 
a signally faithful and valuable member, and one who had 
endeared himself to us all by his obliging disposition, his 
devoted services, and his Christian character. 

Resolved, That Mr. Charles C. Smith be requested to pre- 
pare a memoir of Mr. Dexter for our Proceedings. 

Mr. Warren then offered the following remarks : — 

Mr. President, — I most heartily concur in all that you have 
so eloquently and justly said of our deceased associate, George 
Dexter; but as a classmate and friend I may be allowed a few 
simple words expressive of my appreciation of his high charac- 


ter, and my deep sense of the great loss that has befallen our 

The premature death of a man like Dexter is a double loss 
to this Society, in taking away the ardent impulse and enthu- 
siasm of early manhood, and those many years of earnest and 
important service that we hopefully looked for, and rightfully 
felt were guaranteed by his industry and scholarship. 

I knew Dexter very early in his college career, though the 
long span of the alphabet, so potent a factor in determining 
friendship in those days, separated us more than I could have 
wished, and left to after life a full appreciation of his genial 
spirit, and conscientious critical method of approaching sub- 
jects which engrossed his attention. But even then, though 
quiet and reserved, he made many friends ; and a friendship 
once formed with him could only grow in warmth by closer 
acquaintance. In college he was studious and diligent ; yet 
at that time I do not think he was especially attracted to his- 
torical and antiquarian studies : probably the love for them 
grew upon him as he became more completely the master of 
his own time ; and not unlikely his happy connection by mar- 
riage with our honored and indefatigable associate, Mr. Deane, 
assisted and encouraged him, till these studies became an ab- 
sorbing pursuit. I well remember, on the occasion of a vacancy 
in the office of Recording Secretary of this Society, one of 
our older members, who knew Dexter well, said to me, "What 
an excellent man Dexter would be for that position!" His 
election to membership, and to the secretaryship, was not long 
after this ; and we now gratefully acknowledge his eminent 
fitness for the position, as we recognize his unfailing assidu- 
it}', his valuable and frequent contributions to the Proceed- 
ings, his constant readiness to render assistance to others, and 
his persistent devotion to the veiy laborious duties of the 

I know how easy it is to be led into an exaggerated esti- 
mate of one we mourn ; but I hazard nothing in saying that 
Dexter's capacity and knowledge, his powers of patient inves- 
tigation, combined with an enthusiastic and devoted spirit, 
would, had his life been spared, have gained him very high 
distinction in this Society and in all the walks of life. His 
was a sterling character, equable, trustworthy, and strong. 
His unvarying cheerfulness made his presence always a de- 


light ; and as we watched him at his post here in these later 
days, when the insidious disease marked all too plainly its 
sad progress, we could only admire the buoyancy of spirit and 
uncomplaining fortitude which led him to struggle on when 
hope had almost fled from those that loved him best. The 
same manly courage and hopefulness sustained him to the 
last ; and, passing from us, on the distant shores of the Pacific, 
where be had vainly sought relief in a milder clime, he has 
left to all the remembrance of an upright life, a pure char- 
acter, and an earnest devotion to historical truth, and to his 
intimate acquaintances an abiding sense of real worth and 
true friendship. 

Mr. Foote followed with these words : — 

Mr. President, — Although nothing perhaps can be added 
to the discriminating and appreciative tributes which have 
already been given, I am moved to bear my testimony also 
to the rare character of Mr. Dexter. 

Thirty years ago next summer it was my happiness first 
to meet him, in that place which has witnessed the beginning 
of so many of the best friendships of life, the College Yard 
at Cambridge. The beauty and charm of his character, the 
purity and elevation of his life, the exquisite refinement and 
delicacy of a nature which did not need the maturity of riper 
} T ears to give it dignity and solid worth, and a rare blending 
of qualities which won at once the respect and the affection 
of his associates, — all these were as marked in the college 
boy as they have been in the Christian gentleman whom we 
all have held in special regard, whom they who knew him 
best have esteemed most deeply. In him, as truly as in 
any one that I have known, u the boy was father of the 

From that day to this, his life has been rooted and chiefly 
spent in Cambridge, whose literary and scholarly atmosphere 
seemed to be far more an air native to him than that of the 
eager, prosperous, and splendid Western city of his birth, 
which had hardly then assumed the character of a capital in 
the gracious refinements of art and music that have distin- 
guished it pre-eminently in later years. 

Our friend took excellent rank according to the college 



standards of the day, though the tastes and aptitudes which 
always marked him, and which had begun to qualify him for 
the work which our Society would later offer him, had far 
less scope then than now within the austere lines of recog- 
nized college studies, and had to be chiefly pursued for their 
own sake rather than from any hope of reward or even rec- 
ognition. The College never had a truer lover. It seemed 
as if he could not live content away from the sound of its 
familiar bell. Even the study in foreign universities, for which 
he went abroad after graduation, twenty-five years ago, could 
not long detain him from the banks of the Charles. Fortunate 
in having freedom to choose his own path in life, he made his 
home there. On the reorganization of the methods of admin- 
istration in the University, in 1870, he accepted the position of 
Bursar; but its duties were not specially congenial to him, and 
he soon resumed the freedom to breathe "the still air of de- 
lightful studies," to which he has been able to devote himself 
as he would. 

The close family ties in which he became related to our 
honored associate, Mr. Deane, gave him an opportunity of 
rendering valuable service to the publications of our Society 
for some time before he became a member of it; and his stud- 
ies had long taken more and more a special direction in the 
line of our chosen fields of research. He was particularly 
versed in the early history of this country, and the less known 
portions of it; as, for example, the fascinating chapter of facts, 
stranger than romance, which is opened in the discoveries and 
adventures of the Spanish explorers ; and if he might have 
been longer spared to us, he would undoubtedly have been 
recognized as an eminent authority on these subjects, in which 
his learning and the balance and judicial temper of his mind 
eminently qualified him to take a leading place among our 

By a natural fitness, then, he became a member of this 
Society in 1877, and very shortly after, on the retirement of 
Mr. Deane from the position of Recording Secretary, he was 
elected to succeed him. Never was a choice more fortunate. 
It was not an easy place to fill ; its necessary duties are con- 
siderable ; its indirect opportunities of labor, accurate, pains- 
taking, critical, are boundless ; and no one here needs to be 
told how these difficulties had been enhanced by the way 


that they had been fulfilled by his predecessor, to whom this 
Society owes a lasting debt. All the scholarly qualifications 
of Mr. Dexter found a large scope in the direct and indirect 
work of his official duty here. No one who has not tried 
something of it can form the faintest estimate of the amount 
of labor required for the proper editing of such a class of 
literary work as is contained in one of the volumes of the 
Proceedings of this Society. The editor should be able to 
advise as an expert in every subject treated ; and often a very 
considerable part of the value of the papers as published is 
due to the silent accuracy of his revising and completing pen, 
rather than to the author in whose name the contribution 
stands. In such labor there is abundant field for the nobler 
qualities which rise beyond the level of mere learning, how- 
ever large and full, — generosity, unselfishness, real magna-- 
nimity. Our friend fulfilled in rare measure the noble motto 
of our seal, 'Sic vos no?i vobis ; and the rich volumes in which 
our Proceedings and Publications during the few years of his 
service as Recording Secretary and upon our Committee of 
Publications are hived, are in no small degree a monument, 
not alone to his intellectual, but still more, in these ways, to 
his moral qualifications. I may be permitted to speak from 
some personal experience of the delicacy of conscience and 
scrupulous care to give more than proper credit to others 
for what properly belonged to him, which characterized his 
method of editorial work. He would devote hours and make 
special journeys to investigate points which needed to be 
elucidated in the paper in hand, would embody in a footnote 
what was absolutely the result of his own work, and then 
would append to it the initials of the writer of the paper, 
who never made the studies and never found out the facts, 
rather than run the slightest risk of claiming a shadow more 
than his due. Such traits, I say, rise into the moral atmos- 
phere, and give some indication of the genuine and noble 

Not often has our Society lost one whom it could so ill 
spare, who was so ready and able to give it the laborious 
service which it demands, from a few at least, in order to 
maintain the standard of its own past; not often one wor- 
thier of our remembrance for his blameless and gentle soul, 
the beauty and dignity of his personal character, the sweet- 


ness and refinement of his nature, the patient cheerfulness of 
his constancy in facing the steady advance of the shadow over 
a life in which there was so much to live for, with a courage 
which we have all seen and known here, — and for the trust 
and serene submission of his religious faith as a child in the 
hand of his loving Father. 

Mr. Smith added his testimony, as follows : — 

It is with a deep feeling of personal loss in the death of 
Mr. Dexter, that I rise to add a few words of grateful remem- 
brance to what has been so well and so truly said of him. 
My acquaintance with him did not date from an early period. 
But after he was elected a member of this Society, our rela- 
tions became very intimate, and scarcely a day passed when 
we did not see each other. In that frequent and unreserved 
intercourse no one could have failed to be strongly impressed 
by the extent and accuracy of his information, by the candor 
of his judgments, and by his many attractive qualities as a 
man. He was peculiarly fitted for the duties which devolved 
on him as Recording Secretary and Chairman of the Committee 
for publishing our Proceedings ; and he thoroughly enjoyed 
them. A good classical scholar and familiar with several of 
the modern languages, a wide reader, with habits of diligent 
and exhaustive research, and with a rare freedom from preju- 
dice, he was specially interested in the pursuits for which 
this Society was founded. The office of Recording Secretary 
had been filled for thirteen years in a manner which, as we 
all know, had made it very difficult to find a successor whose 
best efforts would not seem little better than a failure. But 
Mr. Dexter brought to the duties of the office, for which he 
had been selected before he became a member of the Society, 
qualifications of the first order. He had abundant leisure, a 
retentive memory, methodical habits, scrupulous accuracy in 
statement, and a sound judgment ; and the volumes edited 
by him will not suffer by a comparison with the nine admi- 
rably edited volumes which preceded them. As a writer he 
had an easy and polished style ; and the numerous communi- 
cations which he made to the Society were always interesting 
and of permanent value. All this every member quickly 
learned to appreciate ; but it was in the consultations of the 


Publishing Committee, and in the freedom of personal inti- 
macy, that Mr. Dexter's rare qualities were best shown. Here 
every matter relating to the Society and the Proceedings was 
considered ; and on no subject was there ever the slightest jar 
or difference. On other topics of discussion we often differed 
widely ; but it was always with perfect good-humor and 
mutual respect. No one who thus knew Mr. Dexter could 
help feeling for him a warm and deep personal regard. In 
his early death the Society has suffered a loss which all must 
feel ; but those feel it most who knew him most intimately, 
and who looked forward to many years of devoted and bril- 
liant service. To them the memory of his spotless character, 
his genial and courteous manners, and his steadfast friendship 
will always be a precious possession. 

The Resolutions were unanimously adopted. 

The Hon. John E. Sanford, of Taunton, was elected a Resi- 
dent Member of the Society. 

Pamphlets containing the Remarks and Addresses made 
in commemoration of the four-hundredth anniversary of the 
birth of Martin Luther, were laid on the table for distribution 
among the members. 

Mr. Appleton remarked that he had nearly one hundred 
different medals which were struck in honor of Luther, who 
probably ranks fourth among the men who have been com- 
memorated in this way, — Washington, Louis XIV., and 
Napoleon only taking precedence of him. 

Dr. Green called attention to a copy of a short poem by 
Chief Justice Samuel Sewall, which he had recently seen. It 
belongs to Mr. John A. Lewis, of this city, — who has a re- 
markably fine collection of early Boston imprints, particularly 
rich in Mathers, — and was bound up with Sewall's "Pheno- 
mena qusedam Apocalyptica ad Adspectum Novi Orbis confi- 
gurata." The poem was published, anonymously, as a small 
broadside, and does not appear in Mr. Sibley's bibliographical 
list of Sewall's works. The author alludes to it, in his Diary 
(vol. ii. pp. 27, 28), under date of Jan 2, 1700-1, where he 
gives three stanzas which vary somewhat from the correspond- 
ing ones in the broadside. Kettell, in his "Specimens of 
American Poetry " (vol. i. p. xiv), cites it, and says that it is 
" the earliest specimen we have of that sort of occasional com- 
position." It is as follows: — 


WEDNESDAY, January 1, 1701. 
A little before Break-a-Day, at Boston of the Massachusetts. 

ONCE more! Our GOD, vouchsafe to Shine: 
Tame Thou the Rigour of our Clime. 
Make haste with thy Impartial Light. 
And terminate this long dark Night. 

Let the transplanted lEngltsfj Vine 
Spread further still : Still Call it Thine: 
Prune it with Skill : for yield it can 
More Fruit to Thee the Husbandman. 

Give the poor lEnoians Eyes to see 
The Light of Life : and set them free ; 
That they Religion may profess, 
Denying all Ungodliness. 

From hard'ned 3zia8 the Vail remove, 
Let them their Martyr'd JESUS love, 
And Homage unto Him afford. 
Because He is their Rightfull LORD. 

So false Religions shall decay, 
And Darkness fly before bright Day : 
So Men shall GOD in CHRIST adore; 
And worship Idols vain, no more. 

So ^sta, and Africa, 

lEuropa, with America ; 

All Four, in Consort join'd shall Sing 

New Songs of Praise to CHRIST our KING. 

Mr. Winsor mentioned that the Hon. J. Russell Bullock, 
of Bristol, Rhode Island, had recently sent to him a contem- 
porary copy of Dr. Benjamin Church's account of his trial at 
Watertown in 1775. The copy seems to have been made by 
William Bradford, Jr., son of Lieutenant-Governor William 
Bradford, of Rhode Island, for that gentleman, who is said to 
have counselled Church in his defence. Judge Bullock's fa- 
ther received it from Governor Bradford himself. The Society 
has another copy, likewise contemporary ; but apparently not 


in the hand of Church himself. From this copy the paper was 
printed in the first volume of our Collections. Mr. Winsor 
had cursorily examined the two, and thought they were 
identical. He mentioned this Bradford copy now, that there 
might be made a record of its existence, and of another con- 
temporary manuscript copy, preserved among the Sparks 
Manuscripts in the College Library. 

Mr. A. B. Ellis read the following paper, entitled "Ameri- 
can Patriotism on the Sea : " — 

At the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, the American 
colonies had neither vessels of war nor the supplies necessary 
to fit them out. Although the natural resources of a rich 
and undeveloped soil afforded abundant and unsurpassed 
materials for ship-building, and the seaport towns were in- 
habited by numbers of skilled workmen able to make use of 
them, no attention had as yet been paid to the advantages 
thus offered for the construction of vessels especially adapted 
for warlike purposes. Previous to the declaration of hostilities, 
and from earliest times, trading had been carried on by the 
colonies with foreign nations ; but as their commerce had 
been well protected by the naval force of the mother country, 
no occasion had arisen for providing further means of defence 
at their own cost. After the war broke out, and during the 
greater part of the year 1775, Congress was so busily em- 
ployed gathering supplies for the army that neither time nor 
money could be spared for other purposes. The British navy, 
on the other hand, as is well known, at this period and as it 
were by heritage, claimed precedence over that of every other 
nation. At this time it is said to have numbered three hun- 
dred and fifty-six vessels, one hundred and forty being " of 
the line." An American navy, in other words, did not exist; 
while England, in spite of her many enemies, could send a 
well-equipped and powerful fleet of vessels against her rebel- 
lious subjects. 

The means of supplying the deficiency in this important 
branch of the service were very limited. With the exception 
of a few armed schooners and other small craft in the employ 
of some of the separate governments, no force was directly 
available to press into the service of the united colonies. 


Fortunately for the safety of American vessels engaged 
in foreign trade, most of them were warned in time to 
avoid being taken by seeking refuge in neutral harbors. 
But the risk of capture was of small consequence com- 
pared with dangers which threatened the safety of the col- 
onies nearer home. British cruisers and men of war were 
on their way towards the New England coast. Many were 
already in these waters, hovering about and threatening un- 
protected towns and villages on the sea-board. Transports 
heavily laden with supplies of all kinds for the use of the 
British forces were daily expected. In short, all the resources 
of a great and powerful navy were to be speedily employed 
by the mother country against her scattered colonies. The 
situation of the New England colonies soon made them 
realize the critical condition of affairs, and the necessity of 
providing for their own protection without waiting for the 
aid of the General Government. Among others, Massachu- 
setts is credited with making special exertions for supplying 
the need of public armed vessels. On Nov. 13, 1775, "in the 
sixteenth year of the reign of George the Third, King," the 
Legislature of Massachusetts, sitting at Watertown, passed 
an act, " the first of its kind in America," the authors of 
which were Vice-President Gerry and Governor Sullivan, the 
former preparing the preamble, and the latter the special 
provisions, " for encouraging the fitting out of armed vessels 
to defend the sea-coast of America, and for erecting a court 
to try and condemn all vessels that shall be found infesting 
the same." 1 

Previous to this enactment, according to the " Salem Ga- 
zette" of Aug. 10, 1775, the Continental Congress had passed 
a resolution "recommending that each colony at its own 
expense make such provision, by armed vessels or otherwise, 
as their respective Assemblies, conventions, or committees of 
safety shall judge expedient for the protection of their har- 
bors," etc. ; and it was no doubt in part due to this suggestion 
that the Government of Massachusetts passed the foregoing 

It was only about a month previous to this enactment that 
the General Congress had been able to take any active meas- 

1 Clark's Naval History, vol. ii. chap. iv. p. 133. 


ures for the employment of a naval force. On October 5 this 
body met, and, being informed that two unguarded British 
transports were on their way to Quebec loaded with powder 
and other military supplies, of which the continental troops 
were then in great need, chose a committee to consider 
whether anything could be done about capturing them. 
The committee reported, in substance, that it would be advis- 
able to write to General Washington, informing him of the 
sailing of the vessels, and desiring him to apply to the Massa- 
chusetts authorities for the services of two armed schooners 
to be employed in their capture. The colonies of Rhode 
Island and Connecticut were also solicited for the same 
purpose ; but only the vessels mentioned as belonging to 
Massachusetts seem actually to have served. In accordance 
with this report, General Washington wrote a letter, as re- 
quested, which resulted in the sailing of two armed schooners 
from the port of Beverly. One of these vessels, named the 
" Lynch," was of six guns and seventy-five men, and com- 
manded by Nicholas Broughton as commodore ; the other, 
the " Franklin," having four guns and sixty-five men, and 
commanded by John Selman. This was on Oct. 21, 1775, 
and is called " the first naval expedition of the Revolution." 
Although .not successful in the special object of their voyage, 
these armed schooners captured ten other vessels, which were 
forthwith released, as according to the views which then 
prevailed, the colonies professed to carry on war, not against 
Great Britain, as represented by the king and his subjects, 
but simply against its ministers. Congress at first allowed 
the seizure of those vessels alone which contained supplies 
for the enemy, and did not sanction the capture of private 
merchantmen. 1 

The first action taken by Congress with a view to provide 
for a regular navy, equipped and ready for service, was on 
Dec. 11, 1775. 2 The committee reported on the 13th, and 
the resolution which they adopted stated " that five ships of 
thirty-two guns, five of twenty-eight guns, three of twenty- 
four guns, making in the whole thirteen, can be fitted for 
sea, probably by the last of March next ; viz., in New Hamp- 

1 See letter from R. H. Harrison to William Glover, Essex Inst. Coll., 
vol. v. p. 58. 

2 Clark, vol. ii. p. 31. 



shire one, in Massachusetts Bay two, in Connecticut one, in 
Rhode Island two, in New York two, in Pennsylvania four, 
and in Maryland one." Then followed other provisions as 
to the cost of equipment and supplies. 

While all these preparations were going on for the forma- 
tion of a navy, Congress applied to committees of safety and 
councils of various colonies having armed vessels in their 
employ to engage them in the service of the General Gov- 
ernment. Among others, the New England colonies were 
particularly active in affording assistance by enlisting both 
public and private armed vessels in response to the call. 

Vigorous efforts were made by ship-owners to fit out every 
species of craft which could be set afloat with men and sup- 
plies. Volunteers, in great numbers, were induced to join 
the service. Among the promoters of this enterprise was 
General John Glover, of Marblehead, who, besides contributing 
supplies and securing enlistments for the army at his own 
expense, rendered valuable aid to the naval department. As 
a result of the efforts of patriotic men like Glover, the harbors 
and sea-coast of New England soon swarmed with private 
armed vessels. Every seaport town furnished its quota, 
whether great or small, from the New Bedford whale-boat 
and the Gloucester fishing-smack to the Salem frigate. " The 
first commissioned privateer of the Revolution " is said to 
have been "the schooner 'Hannah' of Beverly. Her papers, 
signed by Washington, were issued Sept. 3, 1775. The 
second was the schooner 4 Lee ' of Marblehead, her papers 
being made out in October." 1 Previous to these dates, 
however, many small craft had been enlisted which were not 
regularly commissioned. In an interesting letter published 
in the " New York Evening Post," for July 18, 1883, discuss- 
ing, among other things, the exploits of those brave men who 
are known as the u whale-boat privateersmen of the Revolu- 
tion," the writer refers as follows to their services : — 

" To the student of old men and days, the whole region [of Long 
Island Sound] is storied, having been the scene of some of the most 
gallant deeds, of the whale-boat privateersmen of the Revolution. It 
is singular that no more has been told of these men in history. Many 
readers are unaware of their existence ; yet they formed an efficient 

1 Essex Inst. Coll., vol. x. p. 58. 


arm of the Continental service, and may be regarded as the germ of 
the American navy. Long before Connecticut's war governor had 
placed on the Sound the 'Spy/ the 'Cromwell,' the 'Trumbull,' and 
other audacious privateers to capture the British store-ships, the whale- 
boat crews were abroad, anticipating them in the matter of taking 
stores, and making reprisals on the Tories who swarmed on the 
Sound shore of Long Island. The war found them already organized 
for the capture of the whale ; and, leaving leviathan, they turned their 
attention to nobler game. Companies seem to have existed at this 
time at Stamford, Norwalk, Fairfield, Stratford, Derby, and New 
Haven ; although Fairfield, a leader in the Whig movement, was the 
centre of operations. 

" The whale-boats were well adapted to a predatory warfare. They 
were about thirty-five feet long, and were propelled by eight rowers. 
Each boat carried a large swivel as armament. Their operations were 
conducted swiftly and silently, usually at night. Sometimes a British 
fort or magazine on the island was the objective point ; sometimes a 
Tory murder or outrage was to be avenged, or a prominent leader 
captured in reprisal ; again, a supply-ship or armed vessel was the ob- 
ject, — two of the latter having been captured and towed into Fairfield 
during the war. In all cases the leader mustered his men secretly, 
the boats pushed off at nightfall, rowed swiftly and silently across 
the Sound, struck their blow, and were out of reach of pursuit when 
morning broke." 

W. P. Sheffield, in his " Privateersmen of Newport," men- 
tions similar captures by volunteer forces in row-boats or 
galleys in the harbor of Newport, one of them as early as 
June 13, 1775. 

Among the most important services of the early privateers- 
men was the capture of supplies sent over for the use of the 
British army. The frequent seizure of transports loaded with 
military stores of all kinds, including uniforms and ammunition, 
was of great service to the wretched American forces, who 
were almost destitute of the means of subsistence. During 
the siege of Boston especially, and after the evacuation of the 
town by the British, the army suffered severely for want of sup- 
plies. Besides the lack of food the soldiers had very few tents 
and no knapsacks. Their stock of arms consisted chiefly of odd 
assortments of muskets of all kinds and sizes. Powder was 
scarce, and bullets, of course, varied in size according to the 
calibre of the weapon for which they were moulded. Some of 
the cannon which they used during the siege were dragged all 


the way through the wilderness from Fort Ticonderoga, where 
they had been captured by the British from the French and 
left unprotected. As to the scarcity of powder during the 
winter of 1775, it is said that the American army at one time 
had but seven cartridges for each man. " Our situation in 
the article of powder," writes Washington to Congress, " is 
much more alarming than I had the faintest idea of." " The 
word powder in a letter," writes another, " sets us all on tip- 
toe." Another writes: "The bay is open; everything thaws 
here, except old Put. He is still as bad as ever, crying out for 
powder, powder. Ye Gods, give us powder ! " If it had not 
been for the want of powder, Washington would not have de- 
layed so long in dislodging the British from Boston. Various 
laws and proclamations were made to prevent the waste of 
this precious commodity. Scientific experiments even were 
resorted to, but without much success, to supply the defi- 
ciency. In short, every effort was made to relieve the general 
distress. In this desperate state of affairs the rich spoils 
which were captured by volunteer crews were of the utmost 
benefit to the army. " But there is another point of view," 
says a writer in the " Salem Gazette " of June 9, 1840, " in 
which the efforts of privateersmen may be seen to have been 
extremely advantageous to the country. I allude to the 
munitions of war, stores, clothing, etc., which through their 
exertions were brought into the country at a time when the 
army was suffering for them, and in all probability could not 
have been kept together without them, — the very munitions 
of war which were intended for the British forces, but which, 
thanks to the privateersmen, were wrested from them, and 
thus made to support the very cause which they were originally 
sent to pull down." 

The abundance and variety of the articles included in the 
lists of captures show that the American forces must have been 
literally clothed, armed, and fed, for a time at least, with the 
spoils of the enemy. Almon, in his "Remembrances," gives 
a list of the prizes taken. Perhaps the earliest and most 
authentic accounts of some of these exploits are contained in 
the newspapers of the day. The files of the "Salem Gazette," 
especially, afford much information concerning the successful 
ventures of these early privateersmen, as the following extracts 
will show : — 


Sept. 9, 1775. "Last Saturday a privateer belonging to Newbury- 
port carried into Portsmouth a schooner of forty-five tons, loaded with 
potatoes and turnips intended for the enemy in Boston. 

"In November, 1775, the 4 Lee,' privateer, Captain Manly, took the 
brig ' Nancy,' an ordinance ship from Woolwich, containing a large 
brass mortar, several pieces of brass cannon, a large quantity of arms 
and ammunition, with all manner of tools, utensils, and machines 
necessary for camps and artillery. Had Congress sent an order for 
supplies, they could not have made out a list of articles more suitable 
to their situation than those thus providentially thrown into their hands. 
In about nine days after [this capture], three ships with various stores 
for the British army, and a brig from Antigua, with rum, were taken 
by Captain Manly. Before five days had elapsed several other ships 
were captured. By these means the distresses of the British troops in 
Boston were increased, and supplies for the Continental army were 

Dec. 7, 1775. "On Wednesday morning, last week, Captain Manly, 
in the ' Lee,' vessel of war, in the service of the United Colonies, 
carried into Cape Ann a large brig called the 'Nancy,' which he took 
off that place, bound from London to Boston, laden with about three 
hundred and fifty caldrons of coal ; and a quantity of bale goods, taken 
by Captain Manly, was carried into Salem. She is about two hundred 
tons burthen, and is almost a new ship. Several vessels loaded with 
fuel, provisions of various kinds, &c, bound to Boston, have been 
carried into Salem and Beverly within a few days past." 

Dec. 21, 1775. " Captain Manly has, within a few days past, taken 
another valuable prize, a sloop from Virginia bound for Boston, loaded 
with corn and oats ; fitted out and sent by Lord Dunmore." 

"On the 25th of December last [1775] was taken by a Plymouth 
privateer and carried in there a small sloop from New York, Moses 
Wyman, Master, laden with provisions for the ministerial army in 
Boston, consisting of thirty-five fresh hogs, one hundred barrels of pork, 
fifty barrels fine New York pippins, twenty firkins hog's fat, some 
quarters of beef, turkeys, &c, &c." 

" Last Tuesday sennight, Captain House, with four whale-boats, took 
and carried into Barnstable a. sloop of one hundred and fifteen tons 
burthen, bound from La Have for Boston, laden with beef, hay, potatoes, 
and turnips." (Jan. 19, 1776. This issue mentions two " other cap- 
tures by Manly last Thursday.") 

March 6, 1776. "A few days since, the 'Yankee Hero' sent into 
Newburyport another prize, a fine brig of about two hundred tons 
burthen, laden with coal, cheese, &c, bound for White Haven, for the 
use of the ministerial butchers, under the command of General Howe, 
Governor of Boston. This is the fifth prize out of eight which sailed 


from the above port, and we are in hopes of giving a good account of 
the three remaining." 

March 14, 177G (three days before the evacuation of Boston). "We 
hear that a transport brig of sixteen guns, laden with naval stores and 
provisions bound from Boston for the ministerial fleet at the southward ' ; 
was taken. A ship of two hundred and forty tons also captured by 
Captain Manly about this time was shipped with "six double fortified 
four-pounders, two swivels, and three barrels of powder," while the 
cargo consisted of "one hundred and seventy-five butts of porter, 
twelve packages of medicine with large quantities of coal, sour-krout, 
&c, besides a great number of packages for the officers in Boston. 
She also brought out sixty live hogs, but only one of them was alive 
when she was carried in." 

In June, 177G, two ships, one of three hundred and fifty tons and 
the other of four hundred and fifty tons, loaded with large quantities of 
rum, sugar, spices, &c, were taken. 

The above is not offered as a complete list by any means, 
but only, as before remarked, to indicate the abundance and 
variety of the articles captured. 

According to Clark in his "Naval History of the United 
States," " the number of British vessels captured entering 
Boston Harbor from the 13th of November, 1775, to the 
evacuation of the town by the British, on the 17th of March, 
1776, amounted to thirty-one, their tonnage to 3,645 tons." 

Some of the richest spoils were seized just at the entrance of 
Boston Harbor, shortly after the evacuation of the town by 
the British troops. In the hurried embarkation which formed 
a necessary accompaniment of that withdrawal, those whose 
duty it was to foresee and provide for the consequences which 
it involved, took hasty measures to warn the supply ships 
which were expected to arrive at any moment to keep away 
from the coast. For this purpose, before leaving the outer bay 
or harbor, signal ships were stationed to perform this duty. 
Whether the precautions thus adopted were the best which 
the occasion afforded, taking into consideration even the hurry 
and confusion of their departure, is at least open to question. 
Of course no tidings of the departure of the army from Bos- 
ton had reached the other side of the water. However that 
may be, the result proves that the measures were lamentably 
insufficient. For two or three months these floating sentinels 
remained on duty, and doubtless saved some of the transports 


from falling into the clutches of the lurking privateersmen. 
But after lingering for this brief period in these waters, an- 
noyed on every side by provincial batteries and stray cruisers, 
the last of them set sail and disappeared in the month of 
June, 1776. The harbor and neighboring sea-coast were then 
left to the mercy of the privateersmen. Then, indeed, " our 
little navy had a revel in its prize-takings." No sooner had 
the belated transports arrived off the coast or in the harbor 
where they saw two ships anchored in conspicuous positions, 
still flaunting at their peaks the Union Jack, as if to assure 
them that all was well and they might safely enter, than one 
by one the Yankee volunteer ships pounced upon them and 
relieved them of any further anxiety in the matter. In this 
way numbers of Tichly laden transports, containing a great 
variety of military stores, were seized and appropriated for the 
support of the Continental forces. 

It has been said that " very few of the writers and orators 
on our Revolutionary history have sufficiently magnified the 
w r ork of the privateersmen in promoting the success of the 
cause," those men who sacrificed so much for the good of 
the country. No doubt much of this neglect arises from the 
impression that privateering is only a species of piracy, legal- 
ized though it may be, and that the practice of such a calling 
carries its own reward. This view of the subject at all events 
has largely prevailed. In spite of the sanction which until 
lately has generally been accorded to privateering by civilized 
nations, it is associated in most minds with thrilling stories 
of the sea, in which the black flag figures prominently. The 
enormous profits which are supposed to have been derived 
from the calling have only served to heighten this impression, 
and, from the very uncertainty as to the amount actually 
realized, added to it a still stronger piratical flavor. 

If the full truth were known, however, privateering daring 
the American Revolution at least was not such a profitable 
business as has generally been supposed. Stories are still told 
of the immense fortunes realized out of their ventures by mer- 
chants in Salem, Newport, Baltimore, Boston, and other cen- 
tres of trade. For instance, as one writer says, " the great 
fortune solemnly dedicated by Stephen Girard to pious uses 
is often said to have had its foundation in privateering." The 
same remark has been frequently applied to other accumula- 


tions as well as private fortunes. But these are the exceptions, 
and apply only to the owners of vessels, who of course re- 
ceived the lion's share. As for the men themselves who 
engaged in the calling, what with duties of Government agents 
and other expenses, commissions, and charges, the profits to 
them were often very small. 

As to the practice of privateering, the greatest difference of 
opinion of course has always prevailed. Benjamin Franklin 
was strongly opposed to it as a means of annoying the enemy, 
"and procured an article against it to be inserted in one of 
our treaties with European powers." In his " Observations 
on War" he sa}^s of merchants and traders in unarmed ships 
" that they deserve the protection of both sides, because they 
accommodate different nations by communicating and exchang- 
ing the necessities and conveniences of life," adding that "it 
is for the interest of humanity in general that the occasions 
of war and the inducements to it should be diminished." On 
the other hand, Colonel Timothy Pickering, who held, among 
other high offices during the Revolutionary War, the office of 
Commissioner of Prize Claims brought before the Massachu- 
setts Court of Admiralty, was of an opposite opinion. In his 
manuscript diary in the possession of the Massachusetts His- 
torical Society he says : — 

" I well remember that when John Quincy Adams, American Minis- 
ter to Prussia, was negotiating in 1799 a renewal of Franklin's treaty 
of 1785 (Jefferson and John Adams were united with Franklin) con- 
tracted with the Great Frederick II., the Prussian Ministers desired 
to introduce an article to prohibit privateering, which J. Q. Adams 
stated in Lis letters to the Department of State ; and the President, 
John Adams, was disposed to assent to the request : but I (then Sec- 
retary of State) opposed it, and on this ground, — that, as the United 
States had but a very small naval force, their means of annoying a 
maritime enemy would depend principally on private armed vessels. 
To the best of my recollection the Prussian Ministers persisted in their 
demand, and that this was communicated to the President as before, 
and that he was inclined to give way ; but I persisted to oppose the 
President, and finally declined to yield to the Prussian demand ; and 
so privateering remained on the common footing. 

"In the original treaty, too, of 1785, free ships were to make free 
goods ; but this also was abandoned in the treaty of 1799. See the 
reason assigned in the twelfth article. 


" Nevertheless, John Quincy Adams, become President of the United 
States, when submitting to Congress the project of the Panama Mission, 
proposed, among other objects, to negotiate for the abolition of priva- 
teering, and that free ships should make free goods ; the mischiefs of 
which latter proposition were well exposed by Francis Baylies, in his 
address to his constituents of Bristol County, dated Oct. 2, 182G, as 
published in the ' Columbian Reporter and Old Colony Journal,' Oct. 
11, 1826, — all stipulations with the new Spanish American States, to 
control the international laws of Europe on the above two points and 
concerning blockades, would be futile, if not ridiculous." * 

At a conference of the great European powers, including 
Great Britain, Prussia, France, Russia, and Austria, called 
together in March and April, 1856, for quite another purpose, 
namely, to ratify the treaty of Paris, just as the proceedings 
were drawing to a close, France proposed the following 
articles relating to privateering, which were unanimously 
adopted : — 

" 1. Privateering is and remains abolished. 

" 2. The neutral flag covers enemy's goods, except contraband of 

"3. Neutral goods, except contraband of war, are not subject to 
seizure, except under the enemy's flag. 

" 4. Blockades are not binding, except so far as they are effective." 

M. Emile Carron, in a very able and interesting article on 
"La Course Maritime," published in the "Journal Le Monde," 
about the year 1875, reviewing the whole subject of priva- 
teering and the position which France had always taken prior 
to 1856, writes of what was said at the convention : — 

"Most of the plenipotentiaries present said nothing in answer to 
the proposition, not being sufficiently instructed, as they thought, to 
express an opinion. 

" Lord Clarendon and Baron Manteuffel alone appear to have a 
settled opinion. The first speaks with assurance ; he declares that 
England is wholly disposed to give up forever in favor of neutrals the 
principles which, up to this day, she has invariably maintained. He 
holds privateering to be organized and legalized piracy ; declares that 
privateers are one of the greatest plagues of war ; and closes by saying 
that our condition of civilization and culture requires that there should 

i Pickering MS. Memoranda, vol. ii. p. 109 : July 9, 1828. 


be an end to a system which is no longer in keeping with our time. 
The Prussian Plenipotentiary is of the same opinion. These maritime 
laws which this Congress is invited to adopt, Prussia has always pro- 
fessed and has constantly endeavored to make them prevail. Baron 
Manteuffel expresses the conviction that his sovereign would not refuse 
his assent to the accord which would be established in this way between 
the plenipotentiaries." 

Carron then adds: "Eight days afterwards, the 16th of 
April, 1856, the declaration proposed by France, and so 
firmly supported by the English and Prussian plenipotentia- 
ries, was adopted by the congress without discussion, without 
observation, in silence." " The great interest," the writer 
continues, " attaching to this declaration is in the first article. 
Now, I would like to prove that abolishing privateering 
injures France, without preserving the fixed interests of 
civilization and human progress." The article then proceeds 
to discuss in detail the subject of privateering, strongly de- 
fending the practice, and alluding in glowing terms to the 
bravery and enterprise of French privateersmen from earliest 

The United States although invited to join in signing the 
declaration above referred to, through their Secretary of 
State, Mr. Marcy, formally declined to do so. President 
Pierce expressed an opinion in substance favoring the sec- 
ond and third article, stating that no one could dispute the 
fourth, but wishing to qualify the first by adding the follow- 
ing amendment : — 

"And that the private property of the subjects or citizens of a 
belligerent on the high seas shall be exempted from seizure by public 
armed vessels of the other belligerent, except it be contraband." 

In other words, he wished to go further, and exempt private 
property from seizure in any case, whether by public or by pri- 
vate armed vessels, although at the same time leaving the right 
of blockade untouched. 

All the great modern writers on international law have 
recognized a distinction between operations on the sea and 
by land, as regards the capture of private property. Wheaton 
and Kent both lay down similar rules. The former, in his 
" Elements of International Law," writes as follows : — - 


" The progress of civilization has slowly but constantly tended to 
soften the extreme severity of the operations of law by land ; but it 
still remains unrelaxed in respect to maritime warfare, in which the 
private property of the enemy, taken at sea or afloat in port, is indis- 
criminately liable to capture and confiscation. This inequality in the 
operation of the laws of war, by land and by sea, has been justified by 
alleging the usage of considering private property, when captured in 
cities taken by storm, as booty ; and the well-known facts, that con- 
tributions are levied upon territories occupied by a hostile army, in 
lieu of a general confiscation of the property, belonging to the inhab- 
itants ; and that, the object of wars by land being conquest, or the 
acquisition of territory to be exchanged as an equivalent for other 
territory lost, the regard of the victor for those who are to be or have 
been his subjects naturally restrains him from the exercise of his 
extreme rights in this particular; whereas the object of maritime wars 
is the destruction of the enemy's commerce and navigation, the sources 
and sinews of his naval power, — which object can only be attained by 
the capture and confiscation of private property." 

Kent, in his Commentaries as to " the rights of belligerent 
nations in relation to each other," concurs with the foregoing, 
but observes that there are some qualifications necessary to 
prevent abuse. In short, neither of these great writers can 
be said to favor the practice. 

The practical solution of the question perhaps may be found 
in the introduction of steam navigation. Sailing vessels of 
light draught would of course be of little avail against steel 
or iron cruisers propelled by this motive power. Private per- 
sons, even if they could afford it, would find it difficult to 
obtain either suitable vessels or supplies necessary to over- 
come them. 

But whether the practice of privateering may be justified 
or not, it seems but right that a fair measure of praise should 
be accorded to those who, at a time when all these improve- 
ments and enlightened opinions were unknown, did their 
duty without hope of any great reward, nobly and well, and 
in obedience to orders. This was the case with the American 
Revolutionary privateersmen. The calling which they en- 
gaged in was strictly legal, sanctioned by Government; and 
if any profits were realized the slight benefit derived in that 
way ought not to detract from the value of the services which 
they rendered. 


The volunteers of the American navy perhaps did as much 
for the success of the cause as those brave leaders who fought 
the early battles on land. It may be true, as has been said, 
that privateersmen " contributed as much if not more than 
any others to establish our liberties and the inestimable bless- 
ings which we now enjoy." 

At all events, the daring exploits of such men as Manly, 
Mugford, Tucker, and Whipple, and other leaders in New 
England waters, who by their pluck and perseverance suc- 
ceeded in securing supplies for the sustenance of the army at 
a critical period in its existence, deserve a wider recognition 
in history than they have yet received. These men were the 
pioneers of the navy ; and those whom they led to victory, 
instead of being known by the piratical name of privateers- 
men, and categoried with the Barbary corsairs and the " sea- 
dogs " of the olden time, ought rightfully to be called "the 
militia of the sea," the volunteers of the American navy. 

Admiral Preble exhibited a pictorial chart, which pro- 
fessed to give the origin of the American flag, and said : — 

Last February, I received a note from Mr. Edward W. 
Tuffley, calling my attention to an article written by him for 
the " Brooklyn Eagle," on the origin of our stars and stripes, 
and asking me where the two watch seals of Washington could 
be seen. Soon after he sent me the chart I now present to 
the Society, on which he has proved, to his own satisfaction, 
that Washington's arms were the origin of the stars and 
stripes on our flag. He has since published an illustrated 
article to the same effect in the " St. Nicholas," a magazine 
for young folks. His chart has since been used for advertising 
purposes by a New York Life Insurance Company. 

I wish to place on record my dissent from his theory, which 
is a popular but not a new one. Lowes, an English antiqua- 
rian, made the suggestion man}' years since ; and it was 
repeated by Mr. Haven in a paper read before the New 
Jersey Historical Society in 1872. I have paid some atten- 
tion to the origin of our flag, and after a diligent search of 
the writings of Washington and of his contemporaries, have 
not been able to find a single allusion by him or them to the 
subject. Had our stars and stripes been copied from his arms, 
Washington would have been proud of the fact, and have 


mentioned it in his conversation or his correspondence. The 
stripes were first placed on the English red ensign, as a mark 
of distinction, and as an emblem of the union of the thirteen 
colonies against the oppression of England. The thirteen 
white stars on a blue firmament were, in the words of the 
resolution establishing them, a year after the Declaration of 
Independence, " a new constellation," indicating the birth of 
a new nation. 

As late as May 2, 1792, Washington wrote to Sir Isaac 
Heard, Garter King at Arms, that the subject of genealogy 
was one to which he had paid very little attention, but that 
the arms enclosed in Sir Isaac's letter were " the same that 
are held by the family here." The three mullets or five 
pointed stars on the Washington arms are red on a white 
or silver shield. The arms of William Lord Douglass have in 
chief azure, three white or silver stars, with the red and 
white bars beneath, which is much nearer the devices of our 

Mr. Tuffley, in his letter to me, writing about the pedigree 
of Washington and his chart, says : " You probably knew 
Colonel Chester, — he died last spring; in a letter he wrote 
me shortly before his death, he said he had searched England, 
from the Tweed to the English Channel, and from the Ger- 
man Ocean to the Atlantic, and had failed to discover the 
ancestors of Washington, — the common lot of unbelievers 
in general, I believe," adds Mr. Tuffley. I for one, however, 
would rather accept the research of Colonel Chester, until 
there is proof positive to the contrary, which has not yet 
been furnished. 

The only connection Washington is said to have had with 
our flag is a doubtful one. Mr. Canby, in 1870, read a paper 
before the Pennsylvania Historical Society, in which he as- 
serted that his grandmother, Mrs. John Ross, who was an 
upholsteress and maker of flags, made the first pattern flag, 
of stars and stripes, and that a committee of Congress, accom- 
panied by General Washington, waited upon her in June, 

1776, with a design ; that this design had stars of six points, 
which at her suggestion were changed to stars of five points. 
The stars and stripes were not, however, adopted until June, 

1777, a. year later, and the resolution of Congress was not pro- 
mulgated until September of the same year. 


Mr. Higginson presented a cabinet photograph of John 
Randolph, of Roanoke, in early youth, from a portrait by 
Stuart, preserved in the Coleman family of Williamsburg, 
Virginia. The picture, he said, is mentioned by Mr. Henry 
Adams in his recent Life of Randolph ; and at Mr. Adams's 
suggestion application was made for a photograph to Mr. J. 
R. Bryan, of Fredericksburg, Virginia, the adopted son of 
the eccentric statesman. Mr. Bryan kindly responded by 
sending one ; and the picture proved to be so fine that it 
has been re-photographed, and twelve copies made, of which 
this is one. 

The portrait was quite unknown to Mr. George C. Mason, 
of Newport, Rhode Island, author of the recent Life of Stuart, 
nor is it included in his catalogue of the works of that artist. 
He, however, thinks it one of Stuart's best pictures ; and such 
is the judgment of those most familiar with his paintings. 
There is a peculiar and luminous beauty in the eyes ; and the 
whole effect is singularly in contrast with the traditional 
appearance of Randolph in later years. There is a clumsiness 
about the hands, not uncommon in Stuart's pictures. Mr. 
Bryan thinks that the work was executed " in the early part 
of this century; " but that seems incompatible with the youth- 
fulness of the face, which seems to represent a youth of eigh- 
teen or nineteen, although Randolph was born in 1773. It 
would acid another curious trait to his singular personality, 
if we could suppose that he could have sat, at twenty-seven, 
for a likeness such as this. 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 14th in- 
stant; the President, the Hon. Robert C. Winthrop, in the 

The record of the last meeting, read by the Recording 
Secretary, was approved. 

The gifts made to the Library during the past month were 
reported by the Librarian. 

A letter from the Hon. John E. Sanford, accepting his 
election as a Resident Member, was communicated by the 
Corresponding Secretary. 

The President then spoke in these words : — 

I shall spare you, Gentlemen, and spare myself, from any 
formal introductory remarks this afternoon, and pass at once 
to the presentation of several gifts to our Society which have 
recently reached me. 

The Mayor of Charleston, South Carolina, — the Hon. 
William A. Courtenay, — has sent me for our Library a copy 
of his private edition of the " Porter Memorial," of which 
only a hundred copies were printed. It contains the admi- 
rable tribute of my friend, Judge George S. Bryan, of the 
United States Circuit Court, and of many others of the dis- 
tinguished citizens of Charleston, to the memory of William 
Denison Porter, a jurist, orator, and scholar, of South Caro- 
lina, of the highest distinction, who died in his seventy-third 
year, on the 5th of January, 1883. His family were of Mas- 
sachusetts origin, one of them having served in some of our 
earliest Revolutionary battles. 

Here, in the second place, is a photograph of Henry Clay, 
one of our late- Honorary Members, taken from a portrait of 
him at the age of sixty-five, by Willard, and sent to us by 
Mr. J. K. Porter, of this city, to whom the portrait belongs. 
But Mr. Porter has sent us a much more interesting and his- 
torical photograph of Mr. Clay, in his forty-fourth year, taken 
from an old and rare engraving, in which he is represented 


holding in his hands the famous Resolutions for the recogni- 
tion of the independence of the South American Provinces in 
1821. This photograph gives a vivid idea of Clay as a young 
man, while he was Speaker of the House of Representatives 
of the United States, and exhibits on the table the same ele- 
gant silver inkstand into which I so often dipped my own pen 
a quarter of a century afterwards, and which is still on the 
Speaker's desk at Washington. 

Here, in the next place, is a reminder of the Indian Tribes 
in our far West, to whom so much injustice was shown in 
former years, and from one of the most meritorious of whom, 
as good Bishop Whipple writes me in great distress, a scheme 
of taking away their lands, and robbing them of their homes 
by a forced purchase, is at this moment being arranged and 
executed at Washington. This, however, does not come from 
the Indians to whom Bishop Whipple has so devotedly minis- 
tered, but is an autograph of the great warrior "Sitting Bull," 
who not long ago was giving our Government so much trou- 
ble. The words to which he has subscribed his name, and 
which were taken from his own lips, recognize the law of the 
Great Spirit, and would have gratified good old John Eliot. 
It has been sent to us by Mr. Finotti, formerly the Italian 
Consul in this city, and now settled at Yankton, Dakota 

Another autograph is next in order, and comes to us from 
a remoter region. It is a letter from no less a personage 
than the King of Siam, dated at his " Grand Palace " in 
Bangkok, and with his own signature, " Chulaloukorn, R. S." 
It is sent to us by General John A. Halderman, our United 
States Minister to Siam, who expresses the hope "that it may 
be found worthy of a framed space on our walls." It is the 
king's answer to an invitation from General Halderman to 
attend the opening of the late Foreign Exhibition in Boston, 
and is as follows : — 

R 43/45 Grand Palace, Bangkok, 8th May, 1883. 

Sir, — I have received with pleasure your note inviting me, in the 
name of the Boston Foreign Exhibition, to be present at the opening 
of their grand exhibition. 

Although I am not at present able to leave Siam, and so regret that 
I cannot accept this cordial invitation from a great friendly nation, I 


highly appreciate the good will which inspired the invitation, and heart- 
ily thank your Excellency and those you represent. 

With the assurance of my kindest regards, 


To His Excellency, 

General John A. Halderman, 

U. S. Minister to Siam, &c, &c. &c. 

A more substantial and valuable gift comes next. It comes 
from Mr. William Mi not, from whom we received the inter- 
esting bracelet of gold beads at our last meeting. It is a 
small portrait of Washington Irving, taken by Jarvis in. 1808, 
and of which the costume and hands were painted by Wash- 
ington Allston as late as 1835, at the request of his friend, 
William Sanford Rogers, a former purser of the United States 
Navy, a friend of all our old commodores, — Bainbridge, Hull, 
Morris, — and who, at his death, endowed a school which 
bears his name, in Newport, his native place. It represents 
Irving at twenty-five years of age, in the very year in which 
he published his " Knickerbocker," and is very much like one 
of the engraved portraits of him at the same age. 

I am sure that you will all desire that grateful acknowledg- 
ments of these various gifts should be made by our Cabinet- 
keeper, and it will be so ordered. But still another gift 
will presently be announced by one of our associates, and I 
cannot forbear from saying a few words as to the source from 
which it primarily comes. 

I hazard little, Gentlemen, in saying that, had it been con- 
formable to the usages of our Society to admit ladies to our 
Resident Membership, our first attention this afternoon would 
have been called to some notice of the venerable Eliza Susan 
Quincy, who died at her residence in Quincy,*on the 17th of 
January, in her eighty-fifth year. She was a remarkable 
person, fall of historical reminiscences and of exact historical 
information. She had helped her excellent father, — so long 
our senior member, — by her pen and by her pencil, in all his 
literary labors. His charming Memoir of his own father, — the 
illustrious Josiah Quincy, Jr., of the Revolutionary period, — 
his elaborate "History of Harvard College," and his " Muni- 
cipal History of Boston," owed not a little, as is well known, 
to her discriminating care and judgment. She helped others 
of her family, too, in their various biographical and literary 



productions; and the recent volume of " Reminiscences" of 
the late Josiah Quincy abounds in passages from her careful 
diary. Our own Society, as well as its individual members, 
have had frequent reminders of her thoughtful consideration 
and regard ; and her contributions to our Proceedings and 
archives have been numerous and valuable. Our Cabinet, 
too, is indebted to her for the splendid gorget of Washington, 
worn by him as a British colonial officer, which has a fit 
place at the side of the epaulets worn by him during the 
Revolutionary War. 

I do not propose to dwell upon her character and accom- 
plishments ; but I was unwilling that another gift from her 
should be presented to us by her nephew until I had made 
this brief mention of her death, and of the respect and warm 
regard in which she was held by us all. 

Mr. J. P. Quincy then rose, and made the following 
remarks : — 

I have here certain manuscripts, of which a list has been 
furnished to the Librarian, that are bequeathed to the Massa- 
chusetts Historical Society by the late Miss E. S. Quincy. 
Although the life of this lady was wholly a private one, her 
original research upon subjects connected with New England 
history, and the preservation by her pencil of so many inter- 
esting landmarks of the past, may justify me in adding a few 
words to the remarks of the President. 

Miss Quincy's life — eminently beautiful and successful as 
it was — was the product of conditions gone by, and little 
likely to return. She was content in never overstepping the 
limits by which, rightly or wrongly, the judgment of our 
ancestors bounded the region of woman's activity. Her solid 
intelligence and desire for beneficent exertion did not cause 
a restless reaching after new theories of society, nor was she 
constrained to demand the admission of feminine voters to the 
caucus and polling-room. Deeply appreciating what had been 
accomplished by the men who created the American nation, 
she was willing that new achievements should be made on 
the familiar lines. The town of Boston, in which she was 
born, was something more than an emporium of trade, or a 
swarming-place of foreign voters ready for the political boss. 


The government and social leadership of the community were 
held by a small circle of moral and intellectual prominence. 
In the town, and afterwards in the young city, there was a 
conspicuous nucleus of wisdom which accepted a wholesome 
responsibility for the good behavior of the majority. Miss 
Quincy entered this best society, determined to win for herself 
such opportunities of culture and usefulness as it might afford. 
Possessing in large measure the feminine quality of receptive- 
ness, and constantly meeting the great personages of the 
country, she absorbed the atmosphere which surrounded them. 
Familiar intercourse with John Adams, Timothy Pickering, 
and other survivors of the Re volution, as well as with such 
contemporaries as the second President Adams, Judge Story, 
Webster, Everett, and Ticknor, gave this lady an education 
bearing some resemblance to that of a citizen of ancient 
Athens. She showed the superiority — in important respects, 
at least — of the cultivation which comes from hearing the 
thoughts of powerful minds orally expressed, over the memo- 
rizing of printed words which we accept as its substitute. 
Her journals quickly appropriated the sound reflection or 
interesting information which she knew how to elicit by per- 
tinent questions. She understood that art of good reporting 
which gives the essential color of the past by putting the 
fancy under proper restraint to what may be called the pro- 
saic conscience. The scenes connected with the proclamation 
of peace in 1815, and the account of the visit of the Duke of 
Saxe- Weimar in 1825, are published specimens of her success 
in easy descriptive writing. A journal kept during the visit 
of Lafayette — which is among the manuscripts now given to 
this Society — is a trifling sample of her voluminous contribu- 
tions to this entertaining literature. 

Miss Quincy was her father's constant assistant in his liter- 
ary and political labors ; and to a man necessarily so immersed 
in the present her accurate memory of what had been was of 
the greatest advantage. In deriving so much of her happi- 
ness from service of, and sympathy with, men whom she had 
reason to respect, Miss Quincy was very near the ideal of 
womanhood according to the old standard. Her life moved 
among individualities which seemed more massive and impres- 
sive than those we encounter to-day. Doubtless, to the mod- 
ern woman of her intelligence, her deep inner contentment 



with contracted opportunities of influencing the world would 
be impossible. And so I must emphasize the fact that not only 
was she satisfied with what her tireless industry enabled her 
to do for herself and others, but was especially grateful for the 
place and period in human history in which her life had been 
cast. For none saw more clearly that the world must now 
grapple with problems of a complexity as little anticipated by 
the robust minds of her early association as they anticipated 
the railroad and the telegraph. It was good, she thought, to 
have lived when a woman's duty in the social organism was 
so clearly denned that her path was exempted from confusion 
and unrest. It was good to have lived when Channing's warm 
and benignant light was thawing the frost-bound soil of Puri- 
tanism, and yet before the doctrines of Darwin and Spencer 
challenged beliefs associated with the tenderest human senti- 
ment, even if they are not necessary for the moral progress of 
the race. 

But I have said enough of one who shunned all appeals to 
public approbation, being satisfied with the grateful recogni- 
tion of those immediately surrounding her. So far as the 
practical worth of > example goes, that life seems best worth 
living which shows how much moderate talents may accom- 
plish when directed by a realizable aim, and placed under the 
pressure of constant industry. No better lesson than this is 
to be learned from the stretch of eighty-five years of which I 
have spoken. Even while we utter sincerest words in com- 
memoration of the departed, there is an underlying conscious- 
ness of the fact that the world is not embarrassed by the loss 
of any life, since its place can easily be filled. Yet, now and 
then, an existence germinating from unusual ancestral condi- 
tions and controlled by exceptional circumstances, occupies a 
place so unique that no other existence can be found to fit into 
it. I think that those who knew Miss Quincy will agree with 
me that her life may be so described. It is rare that the com- 
plex forces which create a high type of feminine character are 
expended in a feminine career so beneficent, yet so unobtrusive, 
so harmonious and complete. 

At the conclusion of these remarks a Resolution, expressing 
the deep sensibility of the Society on receiving this bequest, 
was unanimously adopted, and Dr. Ellis was requested to 


prepare a suitable statement for the Proceedings, which is here 
printed : — 

Our President has assigned to me a grateful office, which 1 
gladly discharge, in asking me to furnish for our records a 
recognition of the gift made to this Society in the deposit 
with us of valuable papers by the late Miss Eliza Susan 

Apart from the intrinsic value of the papers themselves, 
they would be appreciated as of interest for us because they 
are the results of the diligent, intelligent, and well-applied 
labor, continued for more than half a century, of a lady in an 
elevated station of life, of remarkable endowments, of most 
gracious and attractive manners, and who enjoyed rare oppor- 
tunities of acquaintance and converse with many important 
events and incidents, and with persons of high distinction in 
both public and private life. Those of us who have been 
longest in the membership of this Society have felt that though 
the name of Miss Quincy could not, according to our usage, be 
upon our rolls, she was really associated with us in the higher 
relation of a patron. Her venerated father was so long our 
Nestor, the family name was so familiar in all our local history, 
and so worthily distinguished on the scroll of patriotism and 
varied public service, that her own inheritance from them and 
her special tastes and interests might well make her an invisi- 
ble attendant on our monthly meetings. Her lengthened and 
highly privileged life was devoted with a singular earnestness 
to a special range of historical and biographical studies and 
writings. / 

The privilege of correspondence and intimacy of personal 
acquaintance with her, enjoyed by some of us, will ever keep in 
our remembrance the deep impressions of respect and esteem 
which her character, her culture, and the delightful charm of 
her old-school manners, refined, tranquil, and yet so animated, 
always inspired. One who would see her needed to seek 
her in the home sphere which she made us feel, rather than 
asserted, was the place of a woman. That term for her sex, 
sufficient in dignity for all who worthily bear it, naturally drew 
to it the prefix of gentle as becoming her own way of mani- 
festing it. Yet it must be said that her home was one where 
were gathered and concentrated resources and influences for 


the development and training of mind and character in all 
attainments and accomplishments, which in ordinary experi- 
ence are found in the open range of the world only by wide 
and judicious intercourse. The national, civic, and academic 
offices filled by her father, whose sternness in fidelity and in- 
tegrity won for him the epithet " Roman ;" the honored tradi- 
tions of her family represented in their generations by their 
portraits and relics; and the selectest social intimates fre- 
quenting the successive city dwellings and the paternal coun- 
try mansion of the household, — gave to the eldest child of a 
noble stock on both sides a home which brought to her all 
that was requisite for training and enriching the finest gifts 
of nature. She once told me how often she read and re- 
perused the novels of Samuel Richardson. She could have 
written and lived all that was best and most graceful in his 
selectest pages. 

There are two classes of papers which come to us in the 
two trunks committed to our care by Miss Quincy. In the 
one are three manuscript volumes from her own pen. Of 
these, two, well bound and in cases provided by her, in which 
she enjoins that they remain, are filled with miscellaneous ma- 
terials collected by her patient and industrious investigations 
for illustrating the history of her own family. By correspond- 
ence abroad and by researches made at her prompting, she 
traces the antecedent lineage in Europe of her first ancestor 
on this soil. Elaborate pedigrees, with noble affiliations illus- 
trated by armorial bearings and seals, are the evidences of the 
chastened and not inordinate satisfaction which she derived 
from following through centuries a name known only by dis- 
tinctions and honors connected with it. Incidentally to this 
matter in her pages she has copied extracts from authorities 
and books, showing a very wide and discriminating acquaint- 
ance with a considerable compass of literature furnishing 
information appropriate to her subject. When she takes up 
the history of her family as represented by the first comer of 
it to this colony in 1633, and ever since identified with the 
occupancy of territory now giving name to a municipality, she 
exhibits all the persistency, thoroughness, and well-rewarded 
results of the best-skilled and most conscientious digester of 
old parchments and papers, identifying places, securing just 
the scrap and relic which she needed, and engaging neighbors 


like John Adams and his son to aid her in a labor the full 
intent of which she kept wholly to herself. For there is a 
charming feminine revelation in a record made by her, that 
" none of the gentlemen of the family " knew how she was 
engaged. Evidently jealous, too, as she might well be, of her 
own individuality in her work, I find inscribed on an introduc- 
tory page this attestation from her honored mother : — 

" Having witnessed the commencement, progress, and conclusion of 
these ' Memoirs/ I think it due to my daughter, Eliza S. Quincy, to 
bear this testimony to the fidelity of her statement concerning them. 
The work was undertaken and completed during the years 1822-23, 
without the assistance of any person, except constant encouragement 
and occasional criticism from me. 

"Eliza S. Quincy. 

" Quincy, Oct. 20, 1826." 

Of course this certificate must be understood as applying to 
the work which Miss Quincy had accomplished up to the time 
of its date, more than half a century ago. The well-filled 
volumes of manuscript contain additional materials inserted 
up to very near the close of her life. Her secret had trans- 
pired. Some of us will recall that on our always pleasant 
visits to her, if, in her discernment, she were sure that her 
guest would appreciate the favor, she would produce the 
volumes, and even let them pass from her own hands, that we 
might read the precious autograph letters of Washington, 
Franklin, Adams, Hancock, and others of renown, addressed 
to her grandfather and great-grandfather, and other original 
papers of import. All beside these autographs and official 
papers was from her own pen ; and she is careful to caution 
us lest the natural changes in her chirography during more 
than half a century should lead to the inference that other 
hands than her own had written on her pages. Her own 
skilful pencil has drawn vividly many scenes and objects, — of 
landscape and dwelling, of the Adams and Quincy and other 
mansions, Penn's Hill, harbor views, etc., — so fondly endeared 
to her. Much material of instruction and delight might be 
selected from these manuscripts, nor has the donor prohibited 
such use of them. 

The third manuscript volume contains a " Journal of La- 
fayette's Visit, 1824-25." Miss Quincy 's father, being Mayor 


of Boston at the time when Lafayette was coming hither as 
" the nation's guest," had addressed to him a letter of warm 
invitation to our hospitalities. This, with the cordial reply to 
it from Paris, opens this volume. Then, with all the charm 
and dignity of her pen in narration and description, Miss 
Quincy, who was ever in a favored place, as helping hostess, 
witness, sharer, and part in all the pageantry, hospitality, 
and ceremonial of the occasion, listener, observer, and skilled 
reporter, daily entered the delightful incidents on her rec- 
ord. Her father's correspondence with Lafayette after his 
return, and other related matter, with excerpts from news- 
papers, orders of exercises at Bunker Hill, etc., enrich the 
volume. This is probably as full, adequate, and tasteful a 
narrative of some beautiful holiday scenes, in private and 
public among us, as is extant here. The late Hon. Josiah 
Quincy was privileged to make some extracts from his sis- 
ter's Journal in his pleasant publication called " Figures of 
the Past." 

The other papers consigned to our care by Miss Quincy 
are principally manuscripts from the pen of her grandfather, 
known as Josiah Quincjs Jr., — that eminent, beloved, and 
trusted patriot, the glory of our Revolutionaiy epoch, cut off 
on the ocean in the flower of his life, as he was within three 
days' sail of his home ; and with whom perished not only one 
who was bearing important secret information to his fellow 
patriots, but one who was the idol of their affections. Very 
pathetic even'to the touch is the original letter in this collec- 
tion, dictated in his last hours by the devoutly resigned sufferer 
to a friendly seaman. His Journal and Letters, written during 
his brief visit to England, and much family correspondence, 
mainly used by his son in the published Memoir of Josiah 
Quincy, Jr. (first edition in 1825, second in 1874), are in the 
collection. Besides these, are the original manuscript of the 
" Observations on the Boston Port Bill, by J. Q., Jr., Boston, 
May 14, 1774," and that of " Instructions to the Representa- 
tives of Boston, May 15, 1770." A large number of notes of 
the legal cases and business which crowded the professional 
career of an ardent lover and worker for the right and the 
good, complete this inventory. 

The following injunction is inscribed by Miss Quincy on the 
inner cover of one of her volumes: — 


" A knowledge of the dangers to which Manuscripts are liable in the 
possession of private individuals, has caused me to consign to the care 
of the Massachusetts Historical Society these two volumes, containing 
Memoirs of Josiah Quincy, Jr., of 1775, and of his ancestors and 
family, collected and written by me, with a request that they may re- 
main permanently in their Library, in the case I have prepared for 
them, and that no person may ever be allowed to borrow them. 

" Eliza Susan Quincy. 
" 5 Park Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 
April 26, 1870." 

Mr. Uriel H. Crocker, of Boston, was elected a Resident 
Member of the Society, and General George W. Cullum, 
U.S.A., was chosen a Corresponding Member. 

The President mentioned that he had received a letter from 
the Rev. George W. Blagden, D.D., who, having removed to 
New York, had ceased to be a Resident Member, bat had 
been nominated by the Council for the Corresponding Roll. 

Mr. Young then said : — 

After the necklace which belonged to " Mumbet" was 
presented to our Society at its last meeting, 1 I made in- 
quiries to ascertain whether she was identical with Elizabeth 
Freeman, who was a negro woman of extraordinary intelli- 
gence, and whose manumission in 1783, it has been believed, 
was the first fruit of the declaration in the Massachusetts Bill 
of Rights, " that all men are born free and equal," and led to 
the abolition of slavery in this State. 2 I was informed by 
Mr. William Minot that she was the same person, and that 
her name originated in this way: Elizabeth, Betsey, Bet; 
then Madam -Bet, the prefix having been given by he/ fellow 
servants, out of respect to her capability and character ; then 
Marm Bet, which was contracted by the children in the family 
to Mumbet. 

1 See ante, p. 3. 

2 This statement is made in the "New American Cyclopedia," vol. xiv. 
p. 487. Chief Justice Gray, of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 
however, in a communication to this Society, April 16, 1874, read the minutes 
of the trial of Nathaniel Jennison for an assault on Quock Walker, in 1781, 
of which Dr. Belknap said, " This decision was a mortal wound to slavery in 
Massachusetts 3 ' (1 Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iv. p. 203), and that it " put an end 
to the idea of slavery in this State " (5 Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iii. p. 403). See 
also " Notes on the History of Slavery in Massachusetts," by George H. Moore, 
LL.D., New York, 1866, pp. 210, ff. 


Mr. Minot has also sent to our Library a pamphlet entitled 
" Restoration of Natural Rights," written with much ability 
and vigor by Henry Dwight Sedgwick, second son of Judge 
Sedgwick, and published in New York in 1831, which is inter- 
esting as one of the early articles on the practicability of abol- 
ishing African slavery in this country. In this pamphlet are 
detailed many particulars relating to the life and liberation 
of the domestic slave above mentioned, who was considered 
a remarkable person in Berkshire, and who died at a very 
advanced age, greatly beloved and lamented. 

A picture of Mum Bet, which was taken in 1811, accom- 
panies this pamphlet, and is presented to our Cabinet by Miss 
Maria B. Sedgwick. It was painted by her mother, Mrs. 
Theodore Sedgwick, the wife of the oldest son of Judge 
Sedgwick, who was a lady of great accomplishments, and well 
known to her contemporaries as the author of some charming 
tales. It adds much to the interest attaching to the keep- 
sake which we have already received, that we now have this 
miniature likeness of the wearer and this historical account 
of her. I beg leave to propose that the thanks of the Society 
be tendered to Miss Sedgwick and Mr. Minot for their accep- 
table gifts. 

The motion was adopted. 

Dr. Ellis read a letter from the bursar of Emmanuel 
College, in Cambridge, England, stating that it was proposed 
to commemorate John Harvard by a full-length figure of him 
in one of the windows of the College Chapel, and asking for 
suggestions in regard to a representation of Harvard himself. 

Dr. Green, in presenting a copy of William Nadir's Al- 
manack for the year 1743, which contained many manuscript 
notes in the margin, some of them of local interest, said : — 

This almanac has been in the possession of my family for 
several generations, and it is only recently that I have been 
enabled to identify the handwriting and establish beyond 
doubt the name of the original owner. The following entry 
is made among the notes, under date of March 2 : — 

" Peter Fanuil Esq r dyed of a complication of diseases, a very fat 
squat man, & has bin Exceeding charitable amogst us, and a great Loss 
in this Tow." 

1884.] REMARKS BY DR. GREEN. 43 

Again, under date of March 10 : — 

" M' Peter Faneuil Esq r burried a very Large funeral went ro-ud y e 
Town house gaue us gloues at y e funeral but sent y e gloues on y e . 11. 
day. his Cofin couer[d] w th black velvet, & plated w ,h y u llow plates." 

In the first volume (page 73) of the Proceedings, it is 
recorded that the gift of " A MS. Journal of a Gentleman 
in Boston, from the year 1729 to the year 1749, from Mr. 
Joshua Green," was made to this Society on July 29, 1794. 
The person presenting it was my great-grandfather ; and with 
the laudable curiosity of a dutiful descendant I set about an 
examination of the manuscript, which consisted of three folio 
volumes made up mostly of items about the weather. There 
are entries here and there of some interest, but generally they 
are of a meteorological character. All the internal evidence 
goes to show that the Journal was kept by Benjamin Walker, 
Jr. ; and not only is the handwriting identical with that in 
the almanac, but often the expressions are very similar, leav- 
ing no doubt that it was Walker who made the marginal 
notes. He refers as follows to the benefactor of the town of 
Boston, and mentions a physical peculiarity not generally 
known : — 

"Thursday 3. [March, 1743.] Peter Fanuil Esq', between 2 & 3 
a clock in y e afternoon dyed of a dropsical complyca, he was a fat squat 
Lame [man,] hip short went with high heeld shoe (In my opinion a 
great loss too This Town aged 42. 8 m) & I think by what I haue 
hear'd has done more Charitable deeds than any man y* euer liv'd in 
this Town & for whom I am very sorry. 

"March 10. Peter Fanuil Esq 1- burried. Bearers Mess" Tom Lech- 
mere Josh. Winslow Jn° Wheelwright And. Oliuer Jn° Gooch Jn° 
Wendall went round y e Town house 

"Thursda 10. Burried Peter Faneuil Esq r in 43^ year of age a fatt 
corpulen brown squat man hip short lame fro childhood." 

Benjamin Walker, Jr., the writer of this Journal, was the 
son of Benjamin and Palsgrave Walker, and born in Boston 
on Jan. 24, 1679-80. He was a shopkeeper, and associated in 
business with his younger brother John. His family is men- 
tioned in Sewall's Diary (vol. iii. pp. 371, 372) ; and additional 
facts concerning it are given in " The New England Histori- 
cal and Genealogical Register " (vol. xv. pp. 53, 54). I have 


but little doubt that he was a kinsman of Isaac Walker, the 
partner of my great-great-granclfather, Joshua Green, and that 
these papers came through this mercantile connection. Their 
firm were extensive owners in a tract of land, known as "the 
Green and Walker grant," and comprising a large part of 
the present towns of Heath and Rowe, in Franklin County 
of this State. 1 The sons of these partners, Joshua Green, Jr., 
and Edward Walker, after the dissolution of their fathers' 
firm by death, kept up the same business, under the same 
style of Green and Walker ; and this fact undoubtedly ex- 
plains the drift of the Journal and this little pamphlet. 

The almanac bears on the titlepage the name of William 
Nadir as the author, and to it are appended the mysterious let- 
ters L. X. Q. It is well known that this name was the pseu- 
donym of Dr. William Douglass, a Scotchman by birth, who 
came to Boston in the early days of his professional career. 
He had received his medical instruction in Paris and Leyden, 
and was a man of good education and many accomplishments, 
though of a peculiar disposition that kept him continually in 
controversy. It was wittily said of him once that he was 
always positive and sometimes accurate. He was well versed 
in the natural sciences, and much interested in astronomy. 

Dr. Douglass opposed strenuously, both by tongue and 
pen, the introduction of small-pox inoculation, though he 
lived to modify his views on this subject. He took up his 
abode at Boston in the year 1718, at which time he was the 
only physician here who had received the Doctorate of 

He writes, under date of Feb. 20, 1720-21, to his com- 
patriot, Dr. Cadwallader Colden who had settled at New 
York, also in the year 1718 : — 

"You complain of the practice of Physick being undervalued in 
your parts and with reason ; we are not much better in that respect in 
this place; we abouud with Practitioners, though no other graduate 
than myself, we have fourteen Apothecary shops in Boston ; all our 
Practitioners dispense their own medicines." 2 

Dr. Douglass appears to have been fairly successful as a 
physician, and in a little more than two years after the date 

1 Holland's History of Western Massachusetts, vol. ii. pp. 382, 419. 

2 4 Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. ii. p. 164. 

1884. j REMARKS BY DR. GREEN. 45 

of this letter he was the owner of a large tract of land in 
Worcester County, which is now included within the limits 
of Douglas, — a town named after him, though the final s is 
dropped. In the year 17o5 he was one of a small number 
of persons who formed a medical society in Boston, the first 
association of the kind in the country. 

In a letter written by him to the assessors of the town of 
Boston, and dated April 23, 1747, he says : — 

" Further I may observe to you that I am or Soon must be in the 
Decline of Human life : therefore do not endeavor to increase my 
Fortune, having no family to provide for : but shall yearly lessen it, by 
dooing charities in my life time by donations and bounties." 1 

I have been thus explicit with Dr. Douglass's affairs in 
order to show that it is not improbable that he was the " cer- 
tain gentleman of the town of Boston," alluded to in the 
printed Journal of the House of Representatives, July 7, 
1739, and about whom a query was raised by our Corre- 
sponding Member, Mr. Moore, of New York, in a letter to 
the President of this Society, 2 written two years ago. 

The entry in the Journal is as follows : — 

" Information being given to the House by the Member from Wor- 
cester, that a certain Gentleman of the Town of Boston, [was] well 
disposed for the Encouragement and Support of a Professor of Physick 
within this Province, and for that good Purpose would chearfully con- 
tribute out of his own Estate a considerable Sum of Money, provided 
this Court will join therein in making a Grant of Lands, or otherwise 
establish a good Fund for the valuable Ends aforesaid; and the same 
being considered ; 

" Ordered, That the members of Boston, Charlestown, Roxbury, and 
Chelsea be a Committee to treat with the Gentleman, hear him on his 
Proposals, and report their Opinion of what may be proper to be done 
for the encouragement of so good a Scheme." 

The member from Worcester who brought the subject be- 
fore the House was Colonel John Chandler, and as Dr. Doug- 
lass was a large land-owner in Worcester County it is not 
unlikely that Colonel Chandler knew him personally. This 
fact, I am aware, has but little weight, but I mention it for 

1 The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, vol. civ. p. 638 : June 8, 1881. 

2 Proceedings, vol. xix. p. 250. 


what it is worth ; and in the absence of positive testimony it 
would seem as probable as not, that Dr. Douglass was the 
" certain gentleman of the town of Boston," who offered to 
endow a medical professorship at that time. The offer, how- 
ever, does not seem to have been accepted, as no further trace 
of it is found in the proceedings of the House, or elsewhere. 
This attempt is by no means the earliest one in Massachusetts 
to promote medical education, as Mr. Moore supposes. Nearly 
a century before this time Giles Firmin, a man learned in medi- 
cine, had given instruction in this branch of science. The apos- 
tle Eliot, under date of Sept. 24, 1647, writes to Mr. Shepard, 
the minister of Cambridge, and expresses the desire that — 

" Our young Students in Physick may be trained up better than yet 
they bee, who have onely theoreticall knowledge, and are forced to fall 
to practise before ever they saw an Anatomy made, or duely trained up 
in making experiments, for we never had but one Anatomy in the 
Countrey, which Mr. Giles Firman (now in England) did make and 
read upon very well, but no more of that now." 1 

An anatomy is the old name for a skeleton; and Mr. Firmin 
may be considered, in point of time, the first medical lecturer 
in the country. His instruction, doubtless, was crude, and 
comprised little more than informal 'talks about the dry bones 
before him ; but even this was a great help to the learners. At 
any rate, it seems to have excited an interest in the subject; for 
the recommendation is made at the session of the General 
Court, beginning Oct. 27, 1647, a few weeks later than the 
date of Eliot's letter, that — 

ft We conceive it very necessary y* such as studies physick, or chi- 
rurgery may have liberty to reade anotomy & to anotomize once in 
foure yeares some malefacto 1 " in case there be such as the Courte shall 
alow of." 2 

Edward Johnson, in his " Wonder-Working Providence " 
(London, 1654), written about the year 1650, describes Har- 
vard College at a period near that time, and says that " some 
help hath been had from hence in the study of Physick " 
(page 165). It is very likely that Cambridge was the place 

1 3 Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iv. p. 57. 

2 General Court Records, vol. ii. p. 175, 

1881.] Clinton's secret journal. 47 

where Giles Firmin had " read upon " or lectured on his 

Even much earlier than this, at the very planting of the 
colony, attention had been given to the need of physicians 
and the importance of medical knowledge. In the first gen- 
eral letter of instruction to Governor Endicott and his Council, 
from the Governor and Deputy of the New England Com- 
pany, dated Gravesend, April 17, 1629, it is written, — 

" Wee haue entertained Lambert Wilson, Chirurgion to remaine 
[with] yo u in the service of the plantacon, w th whom wee are agreed 
that hee shall serve this Companie and the other Planters that li[ve] 
in the Plantacon for 3 yeares, and in that tyme, apply himself to cure 
but also for the Indians, as from tyme to ty[me] hee shalbe directed 
not only of such as came from hence for the gefiall an[d] pticuler accompts 
by yo r selfe o r yo r successo 1 * & the rest of the Councell ; And more- 
over hee is to educate & instruct in his Art one or more youths, such 
as yo u and the said Councell shal[l] appoint that may bee helpfull to 
him and if occasion serve succeed him in the Plantacon, w ch youth or 
youths fitt to learn that pfession lett bee placed w th him, of w ch M r 
Hugessons Sonne if his father approue thereof may bee one, the rather 
because hee h[ath] bin trayned vp in litterature, but if not hee then such 
other as yo u shall iudg most fittest &c." 1 

Here we have the germs of a medical school, which, to be 
sure, did not fructify at once. But who shall say that they 
were not fostered and kept alive during this long series of 
years, in a regular line of descent, under the various and 
varying fortunes of the colony and province, and finally de- 
veloped into the noble institution known to-day as the Har- 
vard Medical School ? Whatever other responsibilities may 
rest upon the shoulders of the founders of Massachusetts, or 
whatever other faults may be charged to their account, it can- 
not be said that they were unmindful, in theory at least, of 
the liberal benefits that accrue from the school of rational 

Mr. T. C. Amory communicated the following paper: — 

It is desirable to have in print, where conscientious histo- 
rians may find it, any information we may possess to explain 

i Suffolk Deeds, lib. i. p. xii. 


what, unexplained, may work injustice. The secret journal 
of Sir Henry Clinton, now in process of publication in the 
" Magazine of American History," is an important contribution 
to the material of our Revolutionary annals. Such journals 
are liable, from their character, to convey erroneous impres- 
sions; and regard for the memory of the dead and the happi- 
ness of the living imposes a duty upon societies like our own, 
to set right what may affect reputation. Present generations, 
more familiar with events comparatively recent, may be better 
able to prevent mistakes creeping into history than those that 
follow them. 

Daniel Sullivan, the elder brother of General John Sullivan 
of the Continental army, and of James, one of the founders 
and the first president of this Society, during the War for 
Independence commanded a force of minute-men, about one 
hundred in number, raised near his home in Sullivan, on the 
east shore of Frenchman's Bay, opposite Mount Desert. They 
protected the neighborhood from depredation, became aggres- 
sive when there was cause, and formed an excellent school for 
recruits for the army. They took part in the attack on Cas- 
tine in 1779, and rendered on other occasions efficient service. 
Soon after, the execution of Andre' provoking a feeling of 
resentment and a disposition to retaliate, the frigate "Alle- 
giance," in Februar} r , 1781, landed a party at night on the- 
shore near Daniel's dwelling, at Waukeag Point. They sur- 
rounded his house while he was sleeping, cast into the snow 
his wife and children, burnt the buildings, and carried him 
prisoner to Castine. 

Declining the usual proffers of rank and reward if he would 
swear allegiance to the crown, he was sent to New York, and 
committed to the Jersey Hulks. These prison ships were 
noted for their foulness, and few came out from them alive. 
Daniel, accustomed to the pure air and freedom of his farm, 
anxious for his family left shelterless, their home in ashes, lost 
health and spirits, and was naturally eager for deliverance. 
While thus confined, Stephen Holland, at one time clerk of 
the Hillsborough County Courts in New Hampshire, who had 
left the State in 1778 under suspicion of disaffection, who had 
then gone to New York, and was now a major in the British 
army, went to see him. As before the war he had known 
General Sullivan, whose extensive professional practice carried 

1884. J Clinton's secret journal. 49 

him into the different counties, he visited Daniel, perhaps of 
his own motion, or he may have been sent by his superior offi- 
cers. Having heard Daniel's story and witnessed his distress, 
he procured for him, from Clinton, permission to visit his 
brother John, then a member of Congress at Philadelphia, to 
effect his exchange. 

General Sullivan was then serving a second term in the Con- 
gress. From September, 1774, to June, 1775, he had taken an 
active part in that body, in organizing resistance to the 
encroachments of the British Government upon the just rights 
of the colonies. With Washington he joined the army besieg- 
ing Boston, in July, 1775, and with General Greene served as 
Brigadier-General under General Lee, who commanded the left 
wing. During the following winter the Connecticut line, its 
period of enlistment ended, went home ; and his efforts and 
influence were largely instrumental in replacing them with 
two thousand troops from his own State. After Howe evacu- 
ated Boston, in March, 1776, General Sullivan was sent to 
Canada, and there extricated our army, weakened by disease, 
from their perilous position, the force opposed to them being 
greatly superior. Recalled to New York, now Major-General, 
with McDougal and Lord Sterling as his brigadiers, they did 
what they could with five thousand men, to withstand four- 
fold their numbers, and, with Sterling, Sullivan was taken 

Exchanged for Prescott, he was honorably noticed in gen- 
eral orders for his services in West Chester, and after Lee's 
capture in December marched his troops to join Washington 
on the Delaware. A few days afterwards he took part as 
commander of the right wing in the battles of Trenton and 
Princeton. He made, in August, an attack at night on Staten 
Island, which a court of inquiry decided deserved the appro- 
bation of the country. At the battle of the Brandywine, in 
command of the right wing, he was opposed, with five thou- 
sand men, to double their force, whom he kept for two hours 
at bay, — for half that time, to use his own expression, muzzle 
to muzzle. Again at Germantown he commanded on the right, 
and drove the enemy opposed to him, when fog and smoke 
and mistakes in other parts of the field led to retreat. The 
army then went into winter quarters at Valley Forge, where 
he was engaged in building a bridge over the Schuylkill. 



Ordered to Rhode Island towards the spring of 1778, as the 
welcome intelligence arrived of the treaty of alliance with 
France, he commanded, at the siege of Newport, ten thousand 
men, whom he helped in raising to co-operate with D'Estaing 
and his fleet. The appearance of a large British naval force 
drew out the French fleet to pursue them. The fleet, shattered 
by the storm and partial conflicts, returned only to announce 
the necessity of their going to Boston to refit. The American 
army, diminished by the departure home of the militia and 
volunteers whose term of enlistment had expired, withdrew to 
Butt's Hill, at the north end of the island. There, and on 
the way, was fought, on the 29th of August, what Lafayette 
pronounced the best-fought battle of the war. It began at 
about seven in the morning, and lasted, with little intermission, 
if any, till four in the afternoon, ending in a bayonet charge 
which drove the enemy to their intrenchments on Quaker 
Hill and Anthony's. The British loss that clay exceeded one 
thousand men, the troops engaged being about six thousand 
on each side. 

The following year Sullivan commanded an expedition of 
four thousand men into Western New York. One object was 
to punish the Indian tribes for their atrocities at Wyoming and 
along the frontier, and deter them from repetition ; another 
was to open the paths for the invasion of Canada if D'Estaing 
returned in season to co-operate. D'Estaing was belated in 
the West Indies, made a hurried and unsuccessful attack on 
Savannah, and returned wounded to France. Sullivan, by an 
accident and the exposures in the campaign, had become inca- 
pacitated for the time for active service, and resigned from 
the army as the year closed. The letter of Washington in 
reply to the communication of his resignation testified to the 
high estimate he held of Sullivan's services in the army. 

He was slowly recovering from serious illness when, without 
his knowledge and against his wishes, as his family needed 
his professional services for their support, he was chosen a 
delegate again to the Congress. Among other duties which 
devolved upon him, he was directed and empowered to defend 
the title of New Hampshire to fifty or more townships of land 
east of the Connecticut. New York claimed them, as she did 
Vermont, as part of her domain, and sent four of her ablest 
advocates to urge her rights. After twenty arguments of the 


cause before Congress, Sullivan succeeded in securing the 
townships for his State. From his long experience in the field, 
he was able to institute many useful reforms in the arm}', as 
also in other departments of the public service. He took an 
active part on the committees for furnishing means for the war 
by improving the currency, restoring credit, inducing the State 
to impose taxes, and procuring loans and subsidies. 

These measures took months to mature ; and as they were 
becoming ripe for adoption, the Continental currency reached 
its last stages of collapse. In various places occurred popular 
demonstrations of discontent, and on the 6th of May, 1781, 
the day Daniel Sullivan reached Philadelphia, similar distur- 
bances took place in its public streets. That night, as he was 
supping with his brother, Daniel gave him a letter from Major 
Holland. Its contents, as it was immediately destroyed, are 
only known by what John told Luzerne a few clays after. It 
is reasonable to presume that one principal subject of Holland's 
letter was Daniel's exchange or liberation. But he took occa- 
sion after complimenting the general upon his intelligence and 
talents, and the high esteem in which he was held by the Eng- 
lish, to add that they regarded him as the fittest man to nego- 
tiate a reconciliation between the mother country and the 
English colonies ; that they wished him to make known his 
sentiments on the subject; that all overtures on his part would 
be received with the consideration which they deserved ; that 
he had only to state his wishes ; that the person who wrote to 
him was fully empowered to open a special negotiation with 
him, and he might count upon the profoundest secrecy. Such 
a proposal of secret correspondence with the enemy so soon 
after Arnold's defection might well have aroused his indigna- 
tion as a reflection upon his good sense as well as upon his 
honor. He burnt the letter before the face of Daniel, and 
begged him to tell those that sent him that their overtures 
had been received with the deepest scorn. 

Still eager to effect Daniel's liberation, John wrote Holland 
an answer to his letter and gave it to his brother to cany to 
him. But upon reflection, lest it should compromise Daniel 
or be misconstrued, he sent next morning for him, as he was 
taking his departure for New York, and took the letter away, 
saying he would find some other means to communicate it to 
Holland. What John said in this interview as Daniel was 


starting on his journey, in the midst of John's various engage- 
ments, in a place subject to interruption and open to observa- 
tion, Daniel might well have misunderstood. In his desire to 
save his brother from captivity and not to wound his sensitive- 
ness by want of cordiality, John's words might have been 
construed to mean more than he ever thought of attaching to 

Some ten days later, after Daniel's return to New York, 
Holland drew up the paper purporting to give an account of 
what took place between the brothers in Philadelphia. If in 
the intervening period John had been heard from, the declara- 
tion would not have been needed. Its obvious object was to 
obtain Daniel's deliverance, and this by representing John as 
"having good intentions towards the English." It abounds in 
improbabilities and exaggerations, and distorts language, possi- 
bly uttered in other connections and susceptible of very differ- 
ent explanation, into an import inconsistent with the whole 
tenor of John's previous life and his subsequent conduct. For 
no sooner had Daniel taken his departure than John went to 
Luzerne, the French minister, the last person he would have 
selected for his confidant if he had entertained any disloyal 
intentions, and told him all that had taken place, with some 
slight reserve as to what might compromise Daniel as an 
American officer or a British prisoner. He may have related 
the circumstances also to his friends in Congress, or to that 
body; but of this we have no evidence. His whole language 
to Luzerne, as set forth in that minister's letter to Vergennes, 
dated May 13, the following Sunday, was that of a man of 
honor and of too much good sense, knowingly, to be placed in 
a false position. 

Sullivan was under obligation to Luzerne. When, in 1774, 
at the age of thirty-four, he went to the Congress, he had 
already accumulated, by his professional labors and judicious 
investments, ten thousand pounds. For seven years he had 
been constantly in the public service, civil or military, and he 
continued in it as long as he lived. His property depreciated ; 
he was considerate of his debtors ; he had a family to support. 
For the last three years of his military service, although in 
command of separate departments, he had received in all fif- 
teen hundred dollars for his pay and expenses, besides rations; 
the last year but forty dollars, as indicated by the paymaster's 

1884.] Clinton's secret journal. 53 

account. One hundred dollars had been advanced to him in 
1780 by New Hampshire towards defraying his travelling ex- 
penses to Congress. His means speedily exhausted, he wrote 
to Weare, president of the State, for remittances. His let- 
ter, intercepted, was carried to New York and printed in the 
" Gazette." It came thus to the knowledge of Luzerne, who 
of his own accord offered him a loan of what was equivalent 
to a year's pay at a dollar a day, or seventy guineas. This 
may have actuated his choice of a confidant when puzzled as 
to what was best to be done in May, 1781. 

The acceptance of this loan in his need has been censured. 
But Sullivan was on friendly terms with Luzerne. France 
was our ally, with no conflicting interests. Six weeks later, 
when the Pennsylvania line, with its pay long in arrears, be- 
came disaffected, a committee composed of Sullivan, Wither- 
spoon, and Matthews, went to confer with Governor Reed of 
that State. Sullivan wrote to Luzerne an account of what 
had taken place, from Trenton, Jan. 13, 1781. His letter closed 
with the following postscript : — 

u One circumstance ought not to he omitted, which in my opinion 
does the insurgents much honor. When they delivered up the British 
emissaries, Governor Reed offered them a hundred golden guineas, 
which they refused, saying that what they did was only a duty they 
owed to their country, and that they neither wanted nor woulcfc receive 
any reward but the approbation of that country for which they had so 
often fouaht and bled." 

He would hardly have thus written to Luzerne if the loan 
made to him seven weeks before had been tainted for either 
by any thought of corruption ; and some of the most honorable 
men in the country, presidents of historical societies, have 
placed on record their sense of its entire propriety. 

The Government owed him six thousand dollars for pay and 
advances while in the army. Though the whole sum was 
finally paid him, fifteen hundred only was voted, July 31, 1781; 
and of this the public treasury could spare, for several months, 
but two hundred. His friends were busily engaged in bringing 
about a more cordial feeling between himself and Burke, of 
North Carolina, who were still at variance about the battle of 
Brandy wine, four years before. Burke thought that Sulli- 


van's five thousand men in the right wing should have subdued 
twice or thrice that number of British veterans, who were far 
better armed and equipped. Probably neither of them allowed 
any personal feeling to interfere with his public functions; but, 
as they were constantly on the same committees, it seemed 
better they should make peace. This was effected by General 
McDougal and Mr. Shiel at this very time ; the former's letter, 
giving an account of their reconciliation, bearing date the 22d 
of May. It is difficult to believe that any one, even if gener- 
ally actuated by selfish considerations, would have incurred 
the risk of forfeiting the esteem of his associates, on whose 
good opinion so much depended, by any questionable pro- 

Daniel at an early age had joined his wife's kinsfolk and 
neighbors, the Beans, Gordons, Hammonds, Plaisdells, and 
Prebles, in procuring a grant of thirty thousand acres, — now 
Hancock and Sullivan, on Frenchman's Bay, — and on a farm 
three or four miles south of the present principal settlement 
was extensively engaged in sawing lumber. Not originally so 
well educated as his three brothers, who were bred to the bar 
and were all successful lawyers, he may have been less sensi- 
tive to John's public obligations and the consequences of their 
violation. The transactions of Congress were manifold in 
their nature, and recorded in separate journals. One of them 
for foreign affairs was secret, as also another for domestic ; but 
those entered on the public journal were generally known. 
What transpired in Philadelphia soon found its way to New 
York ; and it may have had it in mind in signing the 

His anxiety was not without cause. Public opinion in Eng- 
land clamored for retribution for the execution of Andre. The 
Government lost temper at their ill success ; their prisoners 
were sent to England, and there, as here, subjected to inex- 
cusable barbarities. The brutal murder of Colonel Hayne in 
August had already been precedented by like atrocities, which 
at this time or soon after justified the appropriation of the 
Simsbury Mines in Connecticut for a prison house. Daniel's 
principal concern was to regain his freedom, of which he had 
been unwarrantably deprived, while he might, and go home to 
the protection of his family. His brother, conscious of his own 
integrity, which had never been impeached, might well have 


risked reputation for such an object, though nothing would 
have tempted him to forfeit his honor. 

The declaration drawn up by Holland to effect this object 
by conveying the impression of John's good intentions to the 
Crown, may have been influenced by a wish to range John 
on his own side of the contest. Both Holland and Clinton 
probably knew of the overtures to peace communicated by 
Vergennes from Paris sixty days before. Independence even 
to them must have seemed assured ; and an influential friend 
like General Sullivan might save Holland in that event from 
the exile which ended in his death in Ireland as the war. closed. 
There is no evidence or reason to suppose, however, that Gen- 
eral Sullivan in any way authorized Holland to misrepresent 
his dispositions towards England, or did aught to save Daniel 
except through the legitimate channels of exchange. 

Four years before, Judge Livius, also a refugee loyalist 
from New Hampshire, wrote him a letter of like character to 
that of Holland. Many of the leaders were similarly ap- 
proached, but Arnold was almost the solitary instance of 
defection. In burning Holland's letter when he received it, 
General Sullivan had expressed himself in terms sufficiently 
explicit of his indignation. If the next morning, as alleged 
in the declaration, Daniel said that what Holland wished was 
information as to the transactions of Congress and advice as to 
what steps to take, and that he might name his own terms, 
John certainly did not agree to give either. In his kindly 
feeling towards his brother, at what was to prove their last 
parting, he probably did not think any repetition of what he 
had said the night before called for. If he used such phrases 
as set forth in the declaration, " that he was sorry it was too 
late," " that he would ride a hundred miles to see Holland 
and learn his views about politics," " that he would seek an 
occasion for sending Daniel to him," which is very proble- 
matical, they were quite likely used in some other connection, 
and fell short of any proof or reasonable evidence of any agree- 
ment to do aught inconsistent with his existing obligations. 

He did not lose sight of the important consideration as to 
how much Daniel's safety depended upon Holland's kind 
offices. Holland's disposition towards himself seemed friendly, 
and he may have made some allowance for what was dishonor- 
ing in the proposal of terms. He may have considered, as 


suggested to Luzerne a few days after, the opportunity too 
favorable not to be improved for procuring information of the 
enemy's designs and movements. This idea, if entertained, 
soon yielded to the counsels of Luzerne and his own reflec- 
tion on its imprudence. These various reasons explain why, 
if the declaration be a true account of what took place in 
Philadelphia when they parted, which does not seem proba- 
ble, John did not again resent the proposition of Clinton and 
Holland, through Daniel, when repeated that morning, in terms 
more indignant. 

Luzerne's letter to Vergennes, dated the 18th of May, shows 
plainly enough that he had no disloyal intentions. "It is for- 
tunate for his memory that these two documents — one from 
England, the other from France, each giving one side of the 
same transaction, each separately brought back to America 
about a century after their dates — should so completely ex- 
plain each other :" showing that General Sullivan was neither 
corrupt nor disloyal; that under circumstances peculiarly try- 
ing his conduct was that of an honest man and affectionate 
brother ; and that he was sensible enough to guard his repu- 
tation from the misconstructions and misrepresentations of 
those who might seek to defame it, by making the minister of 
France his confidant and the official correspondence the de- 
pository of his abundant justification. Clinton, like Walpole, 
thought every man had his price ; but it was proved over and 
over again during the Revolution that this was not true of the 
American leaders. 

As there is no evidence or reason to suppose that John ever 
gave information or advice to the enemy ; as there were but 
fifteen days, from the 7th to the 22d of May, 1781, when there 
was the slightest possibility that he should have had any 
chance or temptation to do so, and during all this period he 
was busily engaged with the most honorable gentlemen of 
Congress, in public affairs taking a leading part in debate 
and on committees, and on the 26th placed on the Committee 
for Peace, from which Luzerne, who had the best means of 
knowing him, might have easily had him excluded b}^ de- 
nouncing him, if he had any ground of suspecting his integ- 
rity ; as the declaration is susceptible of easy explanation 
without any impeachment of his honor or reputation, — we 
think no conscientious writer on American histoiy, having 

1884.] Clinton's sechet jouPwNAl. 57 

improved all the sources of information that are accessible, as 
our Proceedings must always be, can upon the evidence hon- 
estly question his loyalty and fidelity to all obligations. 

The journals of Congress, his own correspondence, and the 
course of events testify strongly against the likelihood of 
his ever having in the slightest degree favorably entertained 
the temptations presented, or of their having been the slight- 
est temptation to him. If he ever took them into his mind, 
upon the briefest reflection he must have repelled them with- 
out hesitation. If flattered at the thought of becoming the 
mediator of peace when the moment was ripe for such a con- 
summation, he knew that to Congress and our representative 
at Paris had been committed all peace negotiations. The 
proposal of selfish inducements was simply an insult. He 
had been steadfast from the first to the cause of Indepen- 
dence, and he so continued till it was soon afterwards accom- 
plished. For seven years he had been engaged in the conflict, 
had made for it as great ^sacrifices, and endured as great 
hardships, as any other of the patriots. He stood well in 
the public estimation and with the Congress. What object 
could he have had to throw away so honorable a record, 
when fleets and armies were gathering with such reasonable 
prospect of obtaining that for which they had so long been 
contending? . 

If he was ever in doubt as to the issues of the war, his duties 
were too absorbing to admit of any thought of discouragement. 
The journals of Congress, both public and private, exhibit 
the variety and extent of his occupations. Few of the mem- 
bers were more busily engaged or constantly called upon to 
do their part in debate or on committees. In October, 1780, 
he was employed with Madison and Duane in instructing 
Franklin and Jay to maintain the right of the United States 
to all the territory held by Great Britain recognized by the 
Treaty of Paris in 1763, including the navigation of the 
Mississippi. He had moved at that time that a letter should 
be addressed to the King of France, urging a more vigorous 
prosecution of the war. This letter, bearing date the 22d of 
November, was responded to by the king on the 9th of March, 
pledging himself to what was requested ; his response reaching 
Philadelphia on the 22d of May, 1781. 

In December, intelligence being received of the capture of 



Henry Laurens, formerly president of the Congress, who had 
been sent out in July to negotiate a treaty with the States- 
General, and had been imprisoned on a charge of treason in the 
Tower, Sullivan moved that an envoy extraordinary should be 
sent to Paris to solicit the aids requested of the king. John 
Laurens, who had fought valiantly with him at Newport, and 
been seriously wounded with D'Estaing at the siege of Savan- 
nah, was chosen to go. It was indeed understood that the 
mission was especially ordered that he might do what he could 
to effect the release of his father. His mother, and a sister who 
became afterwards the wife of David Ramsay, the historian, 
in 1786 likewise president of the Congress, Avere in Paris. 
They were in the greatest affliction at the impending danger. 
Mr. Laurens, one of the most estimable and honored of the Rev- 
olutionary leaders, was greatly beloved by all who knew him. 
The harsh measures and menaces of the British Government 
naturally overwhelmed his family with the deepest distress. 

It is well known how wisely the time was improved in 
plans for the campaign to come. Dr. Franklin and Ver- 
gennes, the king and young Laurens, at Versailles, on those 
Ides of March mornings, would make an interesting histori- 
cal picture for some genius in art. Perhaps Neckar might 
be added to the group, distressed at the royal extravagance ; 
Cornwallis, entering Virginia, pushing on to Yorktown ; Clin- 
ton, embarking and disembarking his men, not knowing 
whether to go south or bring Cornwallis north ; Lafayette, 
pkiying fast and loose, the more to puzzle them ; Arnold, 
burning Virginia tobacco he could not carry off, and Con- 
necticut churches he did not value enough to leave. To 
keep the bird from startling till De Grasse on the first of 
August, with the best regiments of France collected in the 
nooks and corners of the West Indies, should join Washing- 
ton and Rochambeau, Barras and Lafayette, before the walls 
of Yorktown, depended on secrecy, punctuality, and chances 
so various that the slightest mistake might have proved dis- 
astrous. All went well ; as one of the plotters, Sullivan made 
no mistakes. At the right moment the French fleets entered 
the Chesapeake ; both Washington and Rochambeau were 

In helping on this consummation, General Sullivan had an 
important part to perform in the Congress. The thirteen 

1884.] Clinton's secret journal. 59 

colonies that had declared their independence in July, 1776, lay 
now exhausted. They were represented abroad by Dr. Frank- 
lin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Henry Laurens, Francis 
Dana, Ralph Izzard. In executive offices were Sam Adams, 
Livingston, Cornell ; while Washington, Gates, Greene, Ster- 
ling, Morgan, Wayne, Sumter, and Marion led in the armies. 
Several of the most honored, who had been members of the 
Congress, held high office in the States. Rarely as many as 
thirty attended Congress. This explains why so many duties 
devolved upon the few, — why Sullivan was chosen on so many 
committees. As the first on the list of the most northern 
State, in which order of precedence they were called upon to 
vote, Sullivan's was a responsible position to hold, for reasons 
sufficiently obvious. In military and naval affairs, in the 
Treasury and Foreign departments, there were few more able 
or willing. Langdon, President of Harvard, was his frequent 
correspondent on finance ; and with Witherspoon, President 
of Princeton, he was associated in foreign and financial affairs. 
With Madison, Varnum, Matthews, Carroll, who served with 
him on many committees, he was constantly employed upon 
documents which elicited praise from the most renowned of 
European diplomatists. 

With so few left to share the responsibilities of administra- 
tion and perform its tasks, man}' functions naturally devolved 
on one who had formed part of the government from the 
beginning. He had his rights, not to abuse, but to use for the 
cause ; and as a general he had been trained to respect 
the limits of authority too well to be likely to transgress them. 
If in suggesting to Luzerne the wisdom of using the opportu- 
nity presented by Clinton for procuring information, he claimed 
a larger discretion as one of the Government than he would 
have thought of exercising simply as a member of the Congress, 
allowance should be made for the singular condition of the Gov- 
ernment of the time, having no head, carrying on a war almost 
partisan, and the people being almost equally divided. 

Our struggle for independence was evidently not to go by 
default. Dependence on a nation alien in blood, language, and 
faith had its objections. The approach of the critical moment 
ma} 7 have disturbed the settled views of many ; but knowing 
from history what England meant by unconditional surrender, 
France as a friend and ally, if sometimes exacting, would be 


preferable to the old oppression. There could have been no 
advantages, national or individual, which Britain could offer so 
acceptable as the independence assured by the great Euro- 
pean combinations. 

From the commencement of his term of service, the previ- 
ous September, Sullivan, as mentioned, had taken an active 
part in devising measures for restoring the public credit and 
replenishing the exhausted treasury. In his correspondence 
he had consulted Washington as to the selection of Hamilton 

— who wrought in that department such wonders later — for 
Superintendent of Finance. Hamilton could not be spared 
from the army, and the choice fell on Robert Morris. Con- 
gress, in committee of the whole, had previously kept control 
of this branch of the public service as the Committee on 
Finance. But on the 8th of May, the day after his brother 
Daniel's departure from Philadelphia, General Sullivan moved 
that a committee of five be chosen to devise further ways and 
means to defray the expenses of the ensuing campaign, and 
to consider what further measures could be adopted for a better 
regulation of the public finances. Witherspoon, Sullivan, 
Smith, Clymer, and Rodney constituted this committee. 

Two of their recommendations for redeeming the outstand- 
ing obligations, which were thought too considerate of the 
actual holders, met with little favor; but on the 14th Morris 
accepted the office of Superintendent of Finance, and on the 
17th submitted his plan for the Bank of America. This, 
approved on the 26th, was referred to the committee " to fur- 
nish means for the campaign " to mature and carry out. On 
the 16th, Sullivan, from a special committee, reported the result 
of an inquiry into the management of the loan offices, and on 
the 22d his committee " to furnish means for the campaign " 
offered a resolution, which was accepted, that the war should 
be carried on upon a specie basis, and that rations be purchased 
by contract. 

On the 21st Sullivan reported an order authorizing General 
Gates — then awaiting his trial by court-martial for Camden 

— to repair to head-quarters and take such command as the 
commander-in-chief should direct; and on the 25th, he reported 
another, directing the Board of War to take measures to send 
into New York and Charleston such quantities of tobacco as 
would discharge the arrears due from American prisoners then 

1884.] Clinton's secret journal. 61 

in confinement, and to provide for their future support. As 
chairman of another committee, with Varnum and Bland, to 
whom had been referred the letter of Washington of the 
20th of December, he submitted a rearrangement of the army, 
amounting to a reorganization. It is not proposed to claim 
for Sullivan any exclusive credit for these various measures. 
He did his part with the rest. He co-operated in all the prin- 
cipal reforms which, adopted when our fortunes seemed at their 
lowest ebb, proved the masterly moves on the chess-board 
which achieved independence. One of his earliest duties in 
Congress had been to secure Greene's appointment, whose 
masterly movements that very month had driven Cornwallis to 
his trap. 

On the 22d Luzerne transmitted to Congress a letter from 
the king, expressing an intention to prosecute the war with 
the utmost vigor, and informed them that he had received 
despatches of great importance, which he should hasten to 
communicate when deciphered. On the 25th he informed 
Congress that the second division of the troops, commanded by 
Count de Rochambeau, could not be expected for the campaign ; 
but measures had been taken to reinforce the army and expe- 
dite ships in force to enable the squadron at Newport to put 
to sea. The king had granted a subsidy of six million francs, 
and would enable Dr. Franklin to borrow four millions more. 
The following day another memorial from the minister an- 
nounced certain overtures made by Great Britain for peace, 
through the mediation of the Empress of Russia and the Em- 
peror of Germany, and declared that France was disposed to 
accept them on the basis of independence for the States ; and 
advised that, while negotiating, the efforts against the enemy 
should be redoubled. He requested that a committee should 
be appointed to treat with him for the negotiation. 

The committee, consisting of Carroll, Jones, Witherspoon, 
Sullivan, and Matthews, reported on the 28th and again on 
the 6th of June. They were engaged in the general direction 
of the preparations for many weeks, in framing commissions 
for Dr. Franklin, Henry Laurens, John Jay, John Adams and 
Thomas Jefferson, the appointed commissioners, in determin- 
ing boundaries and other stipulations, and in preparing the 
instructions for the action of Congress. 

In these and similar duties Sullivan was busily engaged till 


September, when, his year having expired and his successor 
having been elected the previous April, he went home to 
New Hampshire. He was there busily occupied in its ad- 
ministration, as major-general in organizing its troops, as 
attorney-general, as president of the State, or Federal judge, 
till his death in 1795. This rapid sketch of his public career 
seems important to be borne in mind in passing judgment 
upon the likelihood of his ever having swerved from loyalty 
to his country. It would seem harsh judgment, — even if it 
should prove that he ever wrote, to save his brother's life, to 
Holland of which no evidence appears that he ever did — that 
he should, after such devotion to the cause of Independence, 
be charged with either corruption or treason. 

Judging by the periods it took for intelligence of a secret 
nature to pass between Philadelphia and New York, the infor- 
mation obtained must have been stale before it reached its 
destination. On the 16th of May the " Adventure," with nine 
hundred barrels of flour, was captured by the " Royal Oak," and 
carried into New York. It had a permit which covered part of 
its cargo or mail. One of Captain Beckwith's correspond- 
ents takes occasion to mention this neglect in a letter of the 
19th of June, thirty-four days afterwards. It reached Beck- 
with only on the 1st of July, with despatches received in May 
from France. Its writer mentions subjects under debate in 
the assembly of his State, which indicate either New York or 
Pennsylvania as that to which he belonged. 

In another letter of the 27th of June, 1781, from a gentle- 
man of Philadelphia to Captain Beckwith,- received by him 
also the first day of July, he speaks of a letter dated May the 
30th received on the 23d June. The correspondence could 
not have been brisk or profitable ; and in this particular instance 
the principal part of the information had long before been 
spread broadcast over the land, or forestalled by the press. 
There were times, during that eventful summer, when secret 
intelligence might have been precious, — for example, in the 
allied armies' circuit round New York, from Newport to York- 
town, — but what proved of most avail was the truth told by 
Washington and Rochambeau, which Clinton refused to be- 
lieve. Leaks, when generals kept their own counsels, were 
unimportant. That much found in Clinton's secret journal 
was purposely designed to mislead him, seems obvious enough. 

1884.] Clinton's secret journal. 63 

There is no evidence that any of the communications printed 
in the journal had come directly or indirectly from General 
Sullivan. We only argue that if they had, they betrayed no 
secret prejudicial to the cause of American independence when 
received by Clinton. 

It was clearly a duty to his brother, cost what it might, to 
do all that he honorably could to save him in his peril from his 
imprisonment. He had no means to give him to rebuild his 
house, burnt without the slightest justification by the British ; 
for the ashes of the Iroquois towns was a retaliation for Wy- 
oming. Their brother James, then judge of the Supreme 
Bench of Massachusetts, had a large family and scanty means. 
If, to further Daniel's liberation, John expressed his wish for 
reconciliation on fair terms and reasonable guaranties, in case 
independence from reverses proved impossible, there Avas no 
treason in that. Daniel was soon exchanged or set free, and 
died on his way home. There is no evidence that John ever 
received any bribe or performed any service for the enemy. 
He was always true to the cause of Independence. Often a 
successful candidate for public office, no such reproach was 
ever flung at him or whispered. He retained to the end the 
confidence of Washington, Greene, Knox, Lafayette, and all 
the best of the patriots. The only key to Holland's declara- 
tion, signed by Daniel, in Clinton's journal, is that the plain 
truth was very much perverted for a purpose ; that John was 
faithful to his brother ; and that if he feigned more affection 
to the British than the infamous course of Clinton in his 
attempts to bribe inspired, his motive was to save Daniel from 
the pestilential vapors of the hulks and restore him to his 
wife and children. 

Nothing is known to the prejudice of Daniel; but, on the 
contrary, much in his favor. Judged by his descendants, he 
was in every way worthy. He was hardly responsible for pas- 
sages in the declaration to which exception is taken. It is 
signed by De Lancy, Daniel, and Holland. This does not look 
as if Daniel signed of his own free will, but from encourage- 
ment, perhaps coercion. Perhaps he smelt the blood of the 
shamble, and instinctively drew back. By threat or in ap- 
prehension of what later betided Hayne, he signed under duress 
of circumstance. It needs no casuistry to hold him blameless, 
to impeach the credibility of the declaration without question- 


ing the truthfulness of his character. Formal oaths under such 
conditions are not binding in honor or conscience, and, extorted 
under threat, have no moral obligation. 

The President then read an interesting letter, which he 
had received from the Count de Paris : — 

Sanlucar de Barrameda, 27. 1. 84. 
Dear Sir, — I received your kind letter six weeks ago, and waa 
anxious to return at once my best thanks for your kind appreciation of 
my two last volumes on the Civil War, and for the way in which you 
spoke of my work before the Historical Society of Massachusetts. 
The praise of such a competent judge as you are is the only reward I 
wish for a work which I have undertaken for a twofold object : first, 
I must acknowledge, my personal satisfaction; for, although a great 
sportsman, I know no greater enjoyment than a quiet day devoted en- 
tirely to 'the pursuit of historical studies and the search for truth which 
is the first element of these studies ; second, the payment of debt of 
gratitude to the people of the United States for the hospitality which 
the Government of the Republic gave my brother and myself in the 
ranks of its army at the time w T e were exiles from our own country. 

Unfortunately, since last summer my work has been practically sus- 
pended. The death of the Comte de Chambord, which made such a 
change in my own situation, has brought upon my hands new and im- 
portant duties, to the fulfilment of which I had to devote all my time. 
The sad news found me fighting the battle of the Wilderness, and 
since the eventful day on which I received these news I have left both 
armies standing without being able to bring the struggle to an end. 
More than this : I have not found time enough to write all the letters 
I had to write, and I had to wait till I came to spend a few weeks in 
this quiet place before I could answer your kind letter. 

Please receive my best apologies, and believe me, 

Yours truly, 

Philippe Comte de Paris. 
Robert Wintiirop, Esq. 

The President afterwards read the following from the 
Secretary of the new Oxford Historical Society : — 

Brasenose College, Oxford, England, 
Jan. 20, 1884. 

Dear Sir, — Many thanks indeed for your kind letter about the 
Oxford Historical Society. We really start with very fair prospects, 
and it is most encouraging to receive such letters from across the 


Atlantic. Our first three volumes we really hope will be out towards 
the close of the year. 

It is very good of you to promise to lay the Prospectus before the 
Council of so well-known a society as the Massachusetts Historical 
Society, whose publications I constantly see in the Bodleian. 
I am, with thanks, very truly yours, 

F. Madan. 

Robert C. Winthrop, Esq., 

90 Marlborough St., Boston, U. S. A. 

Mr. Goodell remarked that since his paper upon the witch- 
trials appeared in the October serial, a reply to some portions 
of it had been read before the Society; and though he did not 
purpose to file a rejoinder, he would ask permission to state 
some additional considerations reinforcing his original argu- 
ment, which will, at the same time, apply to tbe main points 
that have been made against it. He continued as follows : — 

In the first place, to the point that there is a manifest 
distinction between the judicial system established by the 
province charter and that of the mother country, and that 
under the former no commissions of oyer and terminer could 
be issued except upon the previous authorization of the leg- 
islature, I would call the attention of the Society to the prac- 
tice, to-clay, in the Dominion of Canada, where the distinction 
between the legislative and judicial functions is very strictly 
observed, — certainly as strictly as in the province of Massa- 
chusetts Bay under the royal charter. There, notwithstand- 
ing the British North America Act, 1867, which is the organic 
law of the province, confers upon the governor-general the 
exclusive power of appointing the judges of the provincial 
courts, — with certain express exceptions, — the lieutenant- 
governors of New Brunswick and Ontario, in which provinces 
courts of oyer and terminer continue to be held, invariably 
issue the commissions for these courts ; and what gives ad- 
ditional force to this as an instance in point, is the fact that 
while the constitutionality of this practice has never been 
questioned, the authority of the governor-general in respect 
to the personnel of the established courts is so jealously main- 
tained that his exclusive right to appoint queen's counsel, 
both in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, in spite of an act in 
each of those provinces expressly conferring that power upon 



the governor of the province, has been judicially determined 
by the Supreme Court of Canada. 1 

In another aspect, the parallel between the present practice 
in New Brunswick and that of the province of Massachusetts 
Bay, in the issuing of commissions of oyer and terminer, is 
still closer; for, by clause 14 of section 92 of the British 
North America Act, " the administration of justice in the 
province, including the constitution, maintenance, and or- 
ganization of provincial courts both of civil and criminal 
jurisdiction," is wholly and exclusively devolved upon the 
provincial legislature, which has no power to delegate this 
authority in any particular. It follows, therefore, that the 
issuing of a commission of oyer and terminer by the lieuten- 
ant-governor is there clearly understood to be a proceeding 
essentially different from the act of constituting a criminal 
court, within the meaning of the act of parliament. 

Again, it is said that " the General Court did stay ' the 
evil'" of the witch-trials, "in a most effectual manner, by 
abolishing the court of oyer and terminer;" that "they 
bounced this tribunal within a year, and finally passed an 
act rendering any such future abuse of power impossible." 

If this terse and emphatic language is employed to de- 
scribe the effect of the supersedure of the Court of Oyer 
and Terminer by the establishment of the Superior Court 
of Judicature, the implication is extravagantly gratuitous. 
There never was any express dissolution of the Court of 
Oyer and Terminer. As has been already shown, its func- 
tions ceased, ipso facto, the moment a competent court of 
assize and jail delivery began its sessions within the same 
jurisdiction. That such a court would be held in Essex 
County was foreseen when the act establishing the Superior 
Court 2 was passed at the session of the assembly which began 
on the 12th of October ; and an extraordinary term of assize 
and jail delivery was specially appointed by the legislature 
during the same session, 3 for the purpose of trying fresh in- 

i Lenoir et al. v. Kitchie, 3 Duval, 575. 2 Province Laws, 1692-93, chap. 33. 

3 Ibid., chap. 45. From Sewall's Diary, under date of Oct. 26, 1692, it ap- 
pears " that the Court of Oyer and Terminer " counted " themselves dismissed," 
by the vote on a bill for a "Fast and Convocation of Ministers, that [we] may 
be led in the right way as to the witchcrafts." This was a measure promoted 
by the friends and relatives of the accused. Three days later, according to the 
same authority, Governor Phips decided that the court " must fail*" 


dictments for witchcraft. This court, so far from being essen- 
tially a new tribunal, was held, with a single exception, by 
judges, with Stoughton still at their head, who had sat in the 
former trials. 

The new court of assize recommenced the work of prose- 
cuting witches with increased vigor. The new grand juries, 
obedient to the charges of the court, found fresh bills of 
indictment for witchcraft ; and it is said that not less than 
fifty-six of these were preferred at the first term. Certain 
it is that, at the special term at Salem, at the first regular 
term for Middlesex, in the same month, and at the term held 
at Ipswich, in the following month, thirty-one indictments 
against persons accused of covenanting with the Devil or 
practising acts of witchcraft were tried, and that in all but 
three of these cases the petit juries found verdicts of "not 
guilty." Those who were not acquitted were afterwards re- 
prieved or pardoned. 

It would seem therefore, after all, that we are more in- 
debted to the practical common-sense of that most popular 
tribunal, the jury, than to all other influences, for putting a 
stop to those scenes of horror which all the rules of evidence, 
as then understood and practised in the most enlightened 
courts, all the skill and acumen of a trained attorney for the 
prosecution, and all the wisdom of a grave, learned, and pious 
bench of judges, were powerless to prevent. 

It is an important fact, but one which seems to have been 
overlooked by all writers upon these witch-trials, that, in the 
later cases of witchcraft, the jurors were chosen by, and from 
among, all those inhabitants of the province who possessed 
the requisite amount of property to qualify them as electors 
under the new charter. The act requiring this qualification 
for jurors was passed Nov. 25, 1692 ; 1 and though an earlier 
act had prescribed the same qualification for jurors serving at 
the courts of general sessions and of common pleas, 2 no such 
rule had been made or adopted for the Special Court of Oyer 
and Terminer. The only venire for this last-named court, that 
has been preserved, 3 was for the September term, and is 
directed to the sheriff, requiring him to impanel and return, 

i Province Laws, 1692-93, chap. 33. 2 md., chap. 

3 Woodward, vol. i. p. 10. 


as petit jurors, " good and lawful men of the freeholders and 
other freemen " of his bailiwick. Thus it seems that before the 
assizes were established, the jurors were chosen, as in colonial 
times, from among the freemen only ; and these being, by the 
old law, necessarily church members, were more likely to obey 
implicitly the directions of the judges, — with whose preju- 
dices they were in full sympathy, — than were those selected, 
in each town, by the whole body of electors, which had been 
enlarged and liberalized, in conformity with the requirements 
of the charter, by the inclusion of a considerable proportion of 
respectable persons not members of the orthodox communion. 

That the influence of this new element in the bod} T politic 
was felt in the matter of selecting jurors for the Superior 
Court, appears, to some extent, in the rejection of numerous 
indictments laid before the grand juries, though not in so 
marked a degree as in the large proportion of verdicts of 

Another groundless insinuation ought not to be permitted 
to pass unchallenged ; and that is that the eminently conser- 
vative profession of the law, which has never, as such, en- 
couraged, much less started, any political or legal reform, 
would have furnished the world an exceptional example of 
high thinking and just dealing if it could have had the exclu- 
sive management, secundum artem, of the witch-trials. 

Lawyers, naturally and honestly enough, are inclined to 
ascribe all errors and follies of the courts to the want of 
professional training in the judges, and laymen are too ready 
to accept this interested judgment as conclusive. But this 
assumption is only pardonable because the habitual profes- 
sional prejudice upon which it is founded has too long been 
amiably or ignorantly tolerated. It is notorious that the 
Romillys of the legal profession, however eventually suc- 
cessful as reformers, are always in an exceedingly small 
minority, and that their merits are seldom understood and 
appreciated by their contemporaries of the gown. We of this 
generation are witnesses of a remarkable illustration of this 
professional conservatism. For more than a century and a 
half after the juries in Essex and Middlesex had turned the 
tide of persecution against the alleged witches, the lawyers 
both of Old and New England stubbornly adhered to, and the 
judges continued to expound with every refinement of reason- 


ing, a stupendously absurd system of evidence apparently 
contrived to make the judicial ascertainment of truth as 
difficult as possible ; and while we are saved from despair over 
the prospect of ultimately mitigating or removing other fla- 
grant evils in our judicial system by the knowledge that this 
learned rubbish has at length been finally relegated to the 
oblivion it deserves, it is still not to be denied that the law- 
yers who are unreconciled to the common-sense innovation by 
which this obstruction to justice was overcome, are not among 
those who are held in lowest repute for their professional 
ability and attainments. 

The testimony admitted in the witch-trials, here in 1692, 
was, I repeat, admissible by the rules of evidence then gen- 
erally recognized by the most eminent lawyers ; and as to 
the crimes alleged, the indictments, in some instances, were 
copied, verbatim, from the most approved precedents. 1 New- 
ton, the first prosecuting attorney, was, as has been said, a 
trained lawyer; and while it would be unjust to charge upon 
him, the sole responsibility for the results of the so-called 
trials in the Court of Oyer and Terminer, or even for the 
manner in which those trials were conducted, — the admission 
of spectre evidence, the assumption that the accused were 
guilty, the inducements used to extort confessions, and the 

1 It is hard to form a satisfactory conjecture as to the cause of the confu- 
sion in the forms of indictments pref erred at different times during the course 
of these prosecutions. In two instances only — the second indictments against 
Kebecca Eames and Samuel Wardwell, respectively — was the felony expressly 
charged to be in violation of the statute of James I. These indictments appear 
to have been drawn in blank by Newton, or under his direction, and to have 
been subsequently filled in by Checkley; but the latter, in the indictments which 
he himself drew, made the allegation of the breach of the law broad enough to 
comprise, also, the colonial ordinance. Again, it is not improbable that the vio- 
lation of different statutes may have been purposely charged on account of the 
very uncertainty of the law, and, where different indictments were found against 
the same person, from a desire to hold the prisoner to answer to at least one 
valid indictment. On the other hand, there is no indication of any doubt or 
scruple in the minds of the judges, who, in that period of loose criminal prac- 
tice, were probably not more solicitous for the safety of culprits than were con- 
temporary judges in England, and who doubtless were entirely satisfied with 
the very general advice of the reverend clergy, in their " Return," to them and 
their associates in the council: " Nevertheless, we cannot but humbly recom- 
mend, unto the government, the speedy and vigorous prosecutions of such as have 
rendered themselves obnoxious, according to the directions given in the laws of 
God and the wholesome statutes of the English nation, for the detection of witch- 
crafts." — Hutchinson's Hist., vol. ii. p. 51. 


menaces against those who denied their guilt ; all of which he 
must, at least, have approved of or connived at, — the candid 
student of those judicial proceedings will not fail to notice 
that it was not until after this thoroughbred lawyer had been 
superseded as prosecuting attorney that the juries began to 

In regard to the copy of the act to reverse the attainders, 
etc., in the court files at Salem, I did not at first deem it im- 
portant to refer to the handwriting further than to mention 
that the copy was made in the Secretary's office, although the 
experts at the State House were confident that other manu- 
scripts, evidently by the same hand, were Addiugton's ; but 
an intimation that the actual passage of the act in question 
has not been put beyond all doubt by the evidence already 
adduced, makes it important for me to say, here, that a critical 
comparison of the copy at Salem with specimens of Secretary 
Addington's handwriting of about the same date, the genuine- 
ness of which is unquestionable, leaves no doubt that the copy 
procured by Sewall was written by the Secretary himself, and 
lias, therefore, the value of an authentic transcript, although 
it does not now bear, if it ever did, any formal attestation. 

It should also be mentioned that this copy is not the only 
contemporary evidence, besides the record and the printed act 
which has been heliotyped, of the passage of the act ; for the 
petition of Samuel Wardwell in behalf of his mother (Feb. 
19, 1711-12) declares that her " name is not inserted in the 
late Act of the General Court, for the taking off the attainder 
of those that were condemned ; " and Elizabeth Johnson, 
junior, in her petition (of the same date), after stating that 
the General Court "hath lately made an Act for taking off the 
Attainder of those that were condemned for witchcraft in the 
year 1692," represents that her name u is not inserted in said 
act," and prays that, if possible, it may be so inserted. 1 

Mr. Goodell also produced a copy of Governor Shirley's 
proclamation, advertising the stamps which were issued to 
raise money to defray the expenses of the expedition against 
Crown Point at the beginning of the French War. He ex- 
hibited the first printed form of an original writ ever used 

1 See these petitions on file in the Clerk's office, or as printed by Woodward, 
vol. ii. pp. 242, 243. 

1884.] INDIAN LEGENDS. 71 

in Massachusetts ; and a broadside giving the news of the pre- 
liminaries of the peace of Ryswick, in 1697. 

Mr. Winsor introduced a letter from Mr. Charles G. Le- 
land, of Philadelphia, in which he spoke of the very large 
number of Indian legends which he had collected, and of the 
Norse-like element in the myths, which he pronounced fully 
equal to anything in the Edda. There is still extant in New 
England and Canada an almost undiscovered literature of this 
sort, which is of immense value. 

A new serial, including the Proceedings for November and 
December, was laid on the table by the Recording Secretary 
at this meeting. 

Dr. Clarke contributed a Memoir of the late Rev. Dr. 
William Newell. 






William Newell, D.D., minister of the First Parish, Cam- 
bridge, for nearly thirty-eight years, — and a member of our 
Society from December, 1854, until his death, in October, 
1881, — was a man universally respected, and one beloved by 
all who knew him. The sweetness of his disposition was a 
birthright ; he brought it into the world with him. But his 
fidelity to duty, his patience in trial, his constant industry, 
composed a character which attained its perfection as the 
result of life-long effort and training. He grew more and 
more tender, humane, and kindly with his advancing years. 
He met many discouragements, but was never discouraged. 
That which might have disturbed other men, or thrown gloom 
over their later days, left him so cheerful that calamity lost 
its sting, and failed to do him any harm. 

The life of Mr. Newell was uneventful. He was born in 
Boston, Feb. 25, 1804, and was descended from a Bristol mer- 
chant, who settled in Charlestown in 1630. His father, 
Jonathan Newell, died in Boston in 1831. His mother's 
maiden name was Nancy Tuttle, and she was born in Little- 
ton, Massachusetts. William Newell entered the Boston 
Latin School in 1814, having been prepared for that institu- 
tion by Mr. John Lathrop, who gave him a recommendation 
to Mr. B. A. Gould as " a child of uncommon sweetness of 
temper, and, as a scholar, attentive to study and correct in 
deportment." He had a taste for literature, and wrote essays 
and poems which took prizes in the Latin School. He entered 
Harvard College with the class of 1824, and graduated in 
that year as the second scholar ; Edward Bliss Emerson, 
brother of Ralph Waldo Emerson, being the first in rank. 


His intellect was early mature, and his judgment singularly 
sound, if we may judge by what has been preserved of his 
compositions of that early date. The subject of his valedic- 
tory oration was " The Duties of College Students as Men 
and Citizens." It was filled with sound and earnest appeals 
to his fellow students to do something for the country which 
had done so much for them ; exhorting them to cherish and 
practise a true patriotism, not one of mere words, or founded 
only on habit, but based on a conviction of the worth and 
claims of the nation on their public spirit. This tone was 
more common in those days than it has been since. In recent 
times it has been the fashion to treat such sentiments more 
lightly, and to undervalue the enthusiasm which is so proper 
to youth. The affectation of having old heads on young 
shoulders has replaced, in many instances, the generous fire 
of the earlier days. Yet probably this is more a fashion of 
speech than a deep conviction ; and if another call should be 
made on the youth of the University like that of 1861, the 
answer, we doubt not, would be as prompt and self-forgetting 
as it was then. 

In 1825 Mr. Newell was appointed an usher in the Boston 
Latin School, with a salary of $600. He next entered the 
Harvard Divinity School, and graduated in 1829. In the 
same year he made a journey to the South, preaching in dif- 
ferent cities. In 1830 he received a call from the First Parish 
in Cambridge to become its pastor, and accepted it. He 
remained the minister of this church during thirty-eight 
years, and was always listened to with respect and affection. 
He grew, every year, in the knowledge and love of God. 
Older men regarded him as a son ; those of his own age as a 
brother ; and the younger looked up to him as the kindest of 
fathers and friends. So his years passed by, peacefully and 
happily. He saw a great change take place, during the period 
of his ministry, in society, manners, arts. The year that he 
was settled saw the beginning of the anti-slavery movement. 
His ministry lasted some years after the end of the Civil War 
and the downfall of slavery. 

In 1835 he married the daughter of William Wells, a dis- 
tinguished scholar, writer, and teacher. Averse to contro- 
versy, he seldom engaged in theological discussion, though 
accepting fully the belief of the Unitarian denomination. It 




was the custom, when he was settled, to elect the pastor by 
the voters of the town, and to pay his salary by town taxes. 
Long before he left the church, it became a voluntary asso- 
ciation. Its connection with the University was also dis- 
solved during his time, a change of circumstances making this 
desirable. Before his settlement a part of the society had 
seceded and formed the " Shepard Congregational Society." 
This minority protested against the settlement of Mr. Newell; 
but he was not obliged to take any part in the controversy, 
and never did so. After his separation from his pastoral care 
in 1868, he still continued to perform many duties of the 
office, and was constantly called on to visit the sick and dying, 
to assist at weddings and funerals, and was always in his place 
in his pew. He died Oct. 28, 1881. His favorite maxim 
during life was that which lie wrote on the cover of his first 
sermon : " Serve God, and be cheerful." 

Mr. Newell did not publish much ; but all he wrote was 
remarkable for purity of style, perfect taste, and a mastery of 
the English language. He prepared several articles for our 
Society, including notices of deceased members, and other 
papers. The history of " The Cambridge Church Gather- 
ing," with notes, printed in a memorial volume after his death, 
shows much aptitude for historic research, and preserves valu- 
able facts from the earliest days of New England. 

In closing this brief notice, I cannot better show the spirit 
of our associate than by transcribing here a sonnet which he 
wrote on New Year's day, two years before his death, which 
he showed to no one, and which was read for the first time at 
his funeral by the Rev. Francis G. Peabody. 

" Under God's eye, and trusting in his love, 

I launch my boat upon another year, 

And leave to him, my Pilot, safe to steer 
My leaky bark unto the port above. 
Back to the checkered past to-day I look, 

With grateful memories of all he gave, 

While on the shadows of each household grave 
Falls a soft sunshine from the Holy Book. 
Soon shall I leave my dear ones of the earth ; 

Soon shall I meet my dear ones gone before. 
The body's death is the freed spirit's birth, 

And the dark grave to Life the secret door; 
While to Faith's quickened ear the funeral bell 
Blends the glad welcome with the sad farewell." 



The monthly meeting was held on Thursday* the 13th in- 
stant ; the Hon. Robert C. Winthrqp being in the chair. 

The Recording Secretary read the minutes of the previous 

The Corresponding Secretary stated that Mr. Uriel H. 
Crocker had accepted his election as a Resident Member, 
and that General George W. Cullum had signified his accept- 
ance of Corresponding Membership. 

The Librarian presented the list of donors to the Library 
for the past month, and mentioned that one hundred volumes 
had been bound from the income of the William Winthrop 

The President then offered the following remarks : — 

I shall not detain you this afternoon, Gentlemen, by any 
words of my own. I have no letters or gifts to communicate, 
and happily no deaths to announce. We have an election to 
complete, and the First Section is in order for communications, 
including members from A to F. I venture to hope that there 
will not be much time occupied by these communications, in 
view of what is to follow. 

Our usage is to rely on our Resident Members for occupy- 
ing the brief time allowed for our meeting ; but we are always 
glad to have any of our Corresponding Members present with 
us, and from time to time we have had interesting and valu- 
able papers from them. The late George Washington Greene, 
and Professor Dexter of Yale College, have read papers before 
us, within the memory of us all, for which we have been 
greatly their debtors. I could not hesitate, therefore, to 
assure a hearty welcome to one of our oldest and most ac- 
complished Corresponding Members, in reply to his sugges- 
tion of a disposition to come on from New York and address 
us at this meeting. A New England man himself, he has 
long been known as a devoted historical student, and as a 
diligent investigator of controverted subjects in Massachu- 


setts history. A recent communication of his to the American 
Antiquarian Society at Worcester has given occasion to much 
interesting discussion at more than one of our meetings. We 
shall all welcome, I am sure, the additional notes on the Witch- 
craft question which he is prepared to lay before us. 

After calling, therefore, under our rules, upon our First 
Section, I shall take pleasure in presenting to you Dr. George 
H. Moore, of that most interesting institution, — the Lenox 
Library of New York, — the memory of whose munificent 
founder is honored by us all. 

Dr. Ellis presented the certificate of membership of Colonel 
John Popkins, the father of Professor Popkin, and an original 
member of the Society of the Cincinnati, which was signed 
by Knox and Washington. 

The Hon. Martin Brimmer, of Boston, was chosen a Resi- 
dent Member, and the Rev. George W. Blagden, D.D., was 
elected a Corresponding Member of the Society. 

Mr. Cobb then read the subjoined letter : — 

Taunton, October 22d, 1786. 

Sir, — I have been honored with your Excellency's Letter of yester- 
day, per express, with its enclosure. 

The rumor of an opposition to the sitting of the Supreme Court 
here, did not take place till within ten days past, and indeed now it is 
chiefly from the towns of Rehoboth and Freetown ; but that the dis- 
affected in the other parts of the County will join them, is to me a 
matter of no doubt. It has been my private opinion that the opposi- 
tion to the Supreme Court in the two Western Counties would most 
certainly be attended with the like event here, and your Excellency 
will permit me to observe, that it has been a most mortifying reflec- 
tion that Government had not foreseen this evil, as it is the natural 
consequence of a determined Combination to oppose every species of 

I shall make use of every exertion to support the dignity of Gov- 
ernment, that the shortness of the time will permit ; at present I can 
only depend on two Companies of Militia from Raynharn and a Com- 
pany of Volunteers of this Town which will be attached to the Artillery. 
Other Troops are ordered, but being at a distance I shall make but 
small dependence on them. 

The number of the Insurgents is very uncertain, but if they are not 
joined by others from the neighboring Counties, the little force I have 


will be sufficient. If we fail, your Excellency shall have no cause to 
complain of the want of exertion in the Friends of Government here. 
- I have the honor to be, with the greatest esteem and respect, 
Your Excellency's Most Obedient Servant, 

David Cobb. 
His Excellency, Governor Bowdoin. 

On motion of Mr. Smith, it was voted that the Treasurer be 
authorized and directed to add to the balance of income of the 
Massachusetts Historical Trust Fund, now in his hands subject 
to the drafts of the Committee for publishing the Trumbull 
Papers, the income of said fund for the year ending Sept. 1, 
1883, to be used for the volume in preparation by them, 
according to the plan already sanctioned by the Society. 

Messrs. Haynes, Foote, and G. S. Hale were appointed a 
Committee of Nomination in view of the approaching Annual 
Meeting ; and Messrs. Cobb and Abbott Lawrence, a Commit- 
tee on the Treasurer's Accounts. 

The President then introduced, in fitting terms, Dr. 
George H. Moore, who presented the following " Supple- 
mentary Notes on the History of Witchcraft in Massachu- 
setts," with reference to Mr. Goodell's paper on the same 
subject, presented at the meeting in June, 1883: — 

First of all, I desire to acknowledge the characteristic and 
generous courtesy of my friend, who has challenged in so 
charming and chivalrous a manner the correctness of some 
of my statements. One would almost be willing to go astray 
to be brought back to the right path so kindly. I venture to 
differ from him with the highest respect. I am sure of his 
sympathy in the present attempt to explain my position and 
to throw such additional light upon the chief point at issue 
between us as the explanation may furnish. I think I shall 
make it clear that I have not been mistaken in my assignment 
of error. 

In my Notes 1 I pointed out as an error in the current history 
of witchcraft in Massachusetts the statement that the General 
Court passed an act reversing " the several convictions, judg- 
ments, and attainders against the persons executed, and several 

1 Notes on the History of Witchcraft in Massachusetts ; with Illustrative 
Documents. By George H. Moore. Proceedings of the American Antiquarian 
Society, October, 1882, vol. ii. n. s. p. 162. 


who were condemned but not executed." I did not neglect 
to add that " an act of this sort has actually been printed, and 
has found place and authority among recognized materials of 
history ; but no such act ever became a law." I also referred 
to a private act of 1703, reversing the attainders of three of 
the sufferers, and added : " This private act was the only 
law of the kind which can be found in all the legislation of 

The writers whom I criticised furnished no authority for their 
statements respecting the law in question which was deemed 
sufficient by the State Commissioners to warrant them in 
recognizing it as a completed act of legislation. It is not to 
be found in their grand collection of all the Province Laws, — 
that noble and lasting monument of the wise liberality of the 
Commonwealth, as well as the rare learning and ability of the 
Editor. From that fact I gained fresh confidence in the re- 
sults of studies which had led me to deny the existence of any 
such law before the point was thus so authoritatively settled. 

But the present situation is much changed. Since the first 
volume of the Province Laws was published, Mr. Goodell 
has made an interesting discovery, which he regards as conclu- 
sive in determining the validity of the act in question and 
establishing its authority as a complete law. I sincerely 
regret that I am unable to agree with him in this conclusion ; 
but my reasons will appear in what I have to say on the 
present occasion. 

Mr. Goodell has not only met my statements by the confi- 
dent assertion that such an act was actually passed, but he 
has produced a document bearing the imprint, "Boston: 
Printed by B. Green, Printer to His Excellency the Governour 
and Council, 1713." He has most kindly and promptly fur- 
nished me with a fac-simile of it, together with copies of 
everything at his command to illustrate its history. These, 
however, do not include any explanation of its long conceal- 
ment (through more than a century and a half), or whence it 
has now come to assert its own existence and authority, and 
to challenge the criticism which is its due. It is hardly neces- 
sary for me to say that it was entirely unknown to me, or 
to explain that it is not the same thing to which I referred in 
my paper It was equally unknown, no doubt, to all the 
writers whose statements I contradicted. 


" There can be no averment against a record," is good his- 
tory as well as good law ; but history and law alike require 
that a record shall be complete. The House of Representa- 
tives of Massachusetts, in 1770, gave Lieutenant-Governor 
Hutchinson one of their carefully stated legal opinions, from 
which I venture to quote an appropriate passage : — 

" No law can be valid unless it be enacted by the Governor, Council, and 
House of Representatives assembled in General Court ; and this must 
appear from the Parchment roll wherein the act is recorded, otherwise 
the record itself is not complete, and it becomes necessary to resort to 
dehors Evidence to prove a fact essential to the validity of the Act, 
which is against the established rule respecting Records. l 

The rolls of the acts were in parchment under the Province 
Seal. 2 It may be difficult to explain to a generation which 
has almost forgotten the efficacy of any seal, excepting that 
which certifies the brand of a favorite wine, that awful 
mystery of authority and sanctity which belonged to seals, 
from the Great Seal of the Kingdom, or that of the Province, 
down to the curious little impressions in wax which still 
sometimes puzzle the heraldic and genealogical studies of 
local antiquaries. But " the men of Massachusetts " in the 
eighteenth century had not forgotten the traditions of their 
fathers; and every detail of due formality in legislation was 
then as carefully observed as ever was the etiquette of an 
imperial court or a royal household. 

The history of this attempt at legislation may be briefly 
told. A petition had been prepared to be presented to the 
General Court in October, 1708, 'and was presented to the 
Council in the following year, for an act to " restore y e Repu- 
tations to the posterity of the sufferers [in the witchcraft of 
1692], and to remunerate " them for their losses in property. 
Here are two things to be done, which must be kept in 

1 Journal, 1770, p. 134. 

2 This usage apparently did not prevail under the first charter; for in the 
" Observations upon the Laws of Massachusetts, October, 1692," " It is humbly 
enquired whether the Act for continuing the local Lawes to stand in force, &c, be 
not a breach upon the method apointed for the makeing of Lawes either by the 
old Charter or New settlement kaveing never any of them been ingrossed in parchment 
or a seale affixed to them and haveing been declared voyd by the King's Councill 
learned in the lawyor want of such method of enacting" etc. — Province Laws, vol. i. 
p. 109. 


mind: 1. Restoration of reputation; 2. Remuneration for losses 
in property. 

The only immediate action was to order a bill for the first 
of these claims, — restoration in point of character ; and ac- 
cordingly the Bill to reverse the Attainders of several Persons 
for Witchcraft was read three several times, debated and passed 
on the same day (June 10, 1709), the names of the persons to 
be agreed upon by both houses for insertion in the bill subse- 
quently. 1 There is no evidence whatever in this record to 
justify the inference that there was a general feeling in the 
Council in favor of pecuniary reparation, — that part of the 
petition being entirely ignored. 

Nothing further was done during that session ; but the bill 
was again read and voted to be revived on the 9th of 
November in a subsequent session, and sent down to the 
House of Representatives for concurrence, which it failed to 

The next step forward was not taken until after the begin- 
ning of another political year, in a new General Court, on 
June 27, 1710, when a bill of the same tenor, if not the same 
bill, appeared in the Council, with an order annexed thereto 
appointing a joint committee to inquire, — 

1. What names should be inserted in the bill to reverse the 
attainders of the sufferers ; and 

2. What damages they sustained by their prosecution. 
Here, for the first time, we find the claim for compensation 

noticed by the legislature, more than a year after the time 
when it is alleged that the feeling was general in the Council 
favorable to such action. Again : although the committee 
thus appointed performed all the work they ever did on the 
subject in this second year, no further trace appears of legisla- 
tive action until the autumn of the third political year. The 
result of their labors was a report containing, (1) a recom- 
mendation of the names of twenty-two persons, out of the 
thirty -one condemned, to be inserted for the reversing of their 
attainders ; and (2) a statement of the several sums of damages 
which the committee thought would be readily complied with 
by the legislature, to be paid to the same persons whose at- 

1 Why any delay was necessary in agreeing upon the names to be inserted, 
why agreement was suggested, unless there were differences of opinion of a 
serious nature, can hardly be explained. 



tainders they thought should be reversed, the names of Sarah 
Wardwell and Elizabeth Procter being coupled with those of 
their husbands respectively in the award. These women had 
been relieved of their attainder by a previous act of the legis- 
lature in 1703, as well as Abigail Falkner. This woman, who 
was condemned Sept. 17, 1692, reprieved and afterwards par- 
doned by Governor Phips, was not only awarded damages, but 
recommended for a third purgation by this committee. Why 
she needed or received this triple relief from the pains and 
penalties of her conviction and sentence- does not appear. 
The remaining victims — 

Bridget Bishop, executed June 10th, 
Susanna Martin, " July 19th, 
Alice Parker, " September 22d, 

Ann Pudeater, " " " 

Margaret Scot, " " " 

Wilmot Read, " « " 

and Elizabeth Johnson, Jr., condemned Jan., 1693, but not executed — 

were not included in any legislative benefit. 

Perhaps the following brief letter from one of the committee 
to Major Sewall will furnish the clew to an explanation of this 
fact: 1 — 

Mr Sewall. — Sf I thought good to returne to you y e names of sev- 
erall psons y* were Condemned & Executed that not any person or rela- 
tions Appeared in y e behalfe of for y e taking of y e Attainder or for other 
[their ?] Expences, they I supposed were returned to y e Gen 1 Courts 
consideration for to act about according to their best prudence. Bridget 
Bishop alias Oliver, Susanna Martin, Alice Parker, Ann Pudeter 
Welmot Eead, Marget Scot. 

S r I am y rs Honors to Serue, 

Neh. Jewet. 

" The best prudence" of the legislature in leaving out all 
who were not claimants or represented by claimants of money, 
etc., may explain their omission or reluctance to make a gen- 
eral act. 

Another letter of Nehemiah Jewett to Stephen Sewall, 
dated 28th November, 1711, furnishes a list of the names 
of the respective sufferers, and the sums that the petitioners 

1 Records of Salem Witchcraft, vol. ii. p. 249. 


prayed for. A comparison of this list with the report to the 
legislature will show that in every instance (excepting one, 
and that evidently a clerical or typographical error) the 
amounts allowed were exactly the same as those prayed for. 
Why the committee stated in their report that they had heard 
the several demands, etc., and that upon conference these were 
moderated, etc., remains to be explained. 

This report of the committee, bearing date " Salem, y e 14 th 
Sept r , 1710," was read and accepted in the House of Repre- 
sentatives, and sent up for concurrence on the 23d of October, 
1711. It was concurred in by the Council on the 26th of Octo- 
ber, and appears of record as having been consented to by the 
Governor. As without his consent or approbation, signified 
and declared in writing, no law could be of any force, effect, or 
validity whatever, 1 so this report, being an act made by the 
House of Representatives and the Council, became valid as a 
statute by the same consent. 2 

On the 27th of October, 1711, the day after the report of the 
committee became a law, the bill for reversing the attainders 
appears again, with the record that it had been passed by the 
General Assembly at their sessions, 17 09, 3 to be engrossed, 
and a committee had been appointed to consider the names of 
persons to be inserted, and upon their report now inserted, 
was again read and passed to be engrossed. 

On the 2d of November the General Court Records state that 
the engrossed Bill to reverse the Attainders of George Bur- 
roughs and others for Witchcraft passed in the House of 
Representatives, was read and concurred to be enacted. So 
far we have the record, — but no farther. " Here," says Mr. 
Good ell himself, " we encounter a doubt which cannot be 
wholly removed without reference to external evidence." 
There is no record evidence whatever of the consent or appro- 

1 Province Charter. 

2 Barrington on the Statutes, p. 46. 

8 This may have been a clerical error for 1710, as the committee was certainly 
not appointed in 1700, — no very remarkable error, either, all things considered. 
Mr. Goodell says " the bill had been kept alive by virtue of a general order 
passed the Inst day of the second session of 1711, continuing all unfinished busi- 
ness to the fall session." He does not explain how the bill retained its vitality 
during the previous year, — from June 27, 1710, till the 7th July, 1711. But its 
history exhibits an unprecedented series of resuscitations after parliamentary 
death, of which its present resurrection is perhaps the most marvellous. 


bation of the Governor, which was absolutely necessary to 
give any force, effect, or validity to the enactment. " From 
the nature of these records, it follows that an entry of final 
passage is not conclusive evidence of complete enactment." 

I have the highest authority for the statement that the 
Governor's consent was indicated upon the passage of a bill : 

" From 1693 onward the invariable practice was to sign as follows : 

'I consent to the enacting of this Bill. 

Richard Roe.' 

" This was preceded by the usual memoranda of passage by the two 
branches. The memorandum of the Governor's consent was sometimes 
prefaced ' By his Excellency, the Governour,' and this finally became 
the general practice." 

There is, therefore, no probability of setting up any record 
evidence of Governor Dudley's consent to this act. It must 
be proved, if it is proved at all, by " dehors evidence." 

The difficulty thus encountered is very serious, and we must 
have some other evidence to supplement the bare presumption 
that the bill received the Governor's signature, and passed 
the Province Seal. The original records of acts are said to 
have been consumed in the great fire of 1747; — the engross- 
ment of this act is not in the Secretary's office ; nor is a copy 
of the bill, or the original draft thereof, to be found among 
the archives. No mention of any such act has been found in 
the Public Record Office in London, nor any indication of its 
existence in the British Museum or in any other known collec- 
tion, public or private, excepting the well-known manuscript 
at Salem, and the printed sheet of 1713 (now produced), which 
also comes from Salem. 

The copy at Salem, although it is said to be in a handwrit- 
ing which those familiar with the Massachusetts archives can 
identify as that of Addington or one of the nameless clerks 
who assisted him in the Secretary's office, was not attested, 
and bore on its face no evidence of having been signed or 
sealed, and was without the usual memoranda showing the 
dates of the several stages of its passage and the fact of its 

Thus, although it has been considered as an official copy, 
which was procured by an attorney who had been employed for 


the purpose, and by him placed on file among his official 
papers, it bears only the slightest evidence of authority for 
the supposition that the bill ever became a law. The inference 
is unavoidable, that it was inchoate, and at best was indicative 
of what might have been regarded as due to the petitioners, 
or what they themselves desired, but which they may have 
been, either willingly or unwillingly, obliged to relinquish, 
perhaps in consideration of receiving pecuniary relief. 

Sewali's employment to procure " a coppy of the act" bears 
the date " December, 1711." It was therefore obtained prob- 
ably at the same time with the warrant on the Treasury, 
which was dated (Dec. 17, 1711) more than six weeks af- 
ter its passage, and certainly not less than a month after the 
end of the session, 1 when, if ever, the enrolment of the law 
must have been in the Secretary's office. Why is it incom- 
plete? The only explanation possible is that the act was not 
completed. The only complete enactment on the subject at 
that time was the report of the Committee of Award and 
Distribution, which, as I have said, became itself an act or 
law by the signature of the Governor. 

It will be important to keep this fact distinctly in mind 
throughout the whole of the argument which is to follow; 
and I repeat it. The report of the committee which related 
to both the reversal of attainders and the award of indemnity 
became a law in October, 1711. The bill for reversing the 
attainders, which made no reference whatever to any pecuniary 
benefit, never became a law, although it passed through two 
branches of the legislature, Nov. 2, 1711. 

This latter bill, if recognized and accepted by the Commis- 
sioners, must stand alone by itself, without peer or parallel in 
all the legislation of the Province of Massachusetts. I find not 
one act in the whole series so nearly without any support, so 
improbable in itself, or so questionable in shape as it now 
reaches us. 

Mr. Goodell refers to other acts of the same year (1711), 
about the completion of which he had entertained doubts 
which were afterwards cleared up. But this act was not 
among them, and differs entirely in its status. All those 

1 The fifth session of the General Court of 1711-12 ended on the 10th of No- 
vember, 1711. 


referred to are known to have been printed contemporaneously 
in due course and by regular official authority, — two of them 
in the supplements to the edition of 1699 ; one of them a 
Temporary Act of short continuance, published by proclama- 
tion ; and a fourth a Tax Act, always in those days printed 

The only additional light which has enabled Mr. Goodell to 
accept and assert the genuineness of the act is the production 
of a copy purporting to have been printed by the official 
printer two years after the date of its passage through two 
branches of the legislature. 

In ordinary cases this might be taken as conclusive, carry- 
ing on its face presumptive evidence that the necessary 
approval of the Governor could not have been wanting. Very 
high notions were in vogue at that time about the dignity of 
the General Court as well as the Chief Magistrate ; and it 
is difficult to believe that the official printer would dare to 
print as an act of the legislature anything which in any way 
fell short of being so. 

But, granting the fact claimed for it that it was printed in 
Green's office, it is possible that the printer's types were used 
for the purpose clandestinely, with or without his knowledge, 
that he was imposed upon or acted without proper authority, 
and that the sheet was either never publicly exposed or that 
it was promptly suppressed. Most certainly it has never 
been heard of before, or made any public appearance until 
now. The survival of such a leaf of legislation from that day 
to this, in one solitary printed copy, so far from supporting or 
being supported by the Salem manuscript, bears in itself the 
same damaging evidence of incompleteness, and provokes 
the same criticisms. It must be regarded as an imperfect 
and unsuccessful attempt to satisfy the claim for redress, 
which had been stumbling and halting through several years 
of hesitation between justice and expediency, and fell still- 
born into the hands of the thrifty clerk of the Salem courts, 
who became attorney for the poor and scattered members and 
representatives of those families which had been ruined in the 
diabolical storm of 1692. 

The doubt is sufficient in my judgment to warrant the most 
sceptical criticism of the act itself as it appears in print, and 
the most careful scrutiny of every item of support that is 


claimed for it. It is proper to repeat here that this newly 
discovered " printed act . . . which is believed to be unique," 
is the only new evidence in the case. The copy which is on 
the court files at Salem, printed by Mr. Woodward in 1864, 
was, and is, just as well fortified by the record as this printed 
copy of 171o, now first produced; and nothing is yet brought 
to support the genuineness of the latter, which is not equally 
conclusive in favor of the old manuscript. 

Mr. Goodell says, however, that "the record shows that 
Dudley consented to the report of the committee, . . . and 
as this report supplied all that was wanting to make the bill, 
which had passed the several stages of legislation, complete," 
etc., the Secretary in making up his records might have 
regarded such record of consent as sufficient for the bill as 
well as the report. 

Now the fact is, that the report was accepted in the House of 
Representatives on the 23d of October, 1711, and the Council 
concurred on the 26th, when the Governor also consented 
to it. 

The act, however, for reversing the attainders, so far from 
having already " passed the several stages of legislation," had 
been slumbering quietly somewhere for a year and a half, 
and had not even been revived in that General Court before 
the report had become a law. Then, on the next day, Oct. 
27, 1711, its long rest was disturbed, and the act was pro- 
duced, read, and passed to be engrossed. But although thus 
hastily revived, it did not pass the stage of legislation neces- 
sary to make it " complete and ready for the executive 
approval" until November 2, one day less than a week 
after the approval of the report, so that it is not at all 
likely that the Secretary could have been mistaken or mis- 
led, or otherwise failed in his duty in the fashion suggested. 
The presumption here is in favor of that officer : Omnia pre- 
sumuntur rite ac solenniter acta. 

Mr, Goodell goes on to say: " This act having been passed 
and the required sum appropriated, a warrant, in due form, 
for drawing the same from the treasury, was issued by the 
Secretary and signed b}^ the Governor, Dec. 17, 1711." 

In this proceeding there was not the slightest reference to 
" this act," in any stage of it; but on the contrary the warrant 
itself expressly refers to the report of the committee accepted 


by the General Assembly as its foundation and authority. 
We ask in vain, why was the act thus ignored? Why was 
it that an act was not drawn embracing all the recommenda- 
tions of the committee, and furnishing a clear and unmistak- 
able restoration, by the reversal of all the attainders and award 
of damages by authority of express enactment in the usual 
form ? 

Mr. Goodell adduces as further evidence that " the act 
became a law . . . the declaration to that effect of those who 
united in appointing Stephen Sewall to collect the compen- 
sation awarded to them by the committee, in 1711, and also 
their request that he procure a copy of the act." 

The so-called " declaration to that effect " is that they " are 
informed " of the passage of " an act in favour of us respecting 
our Reputations and Estates ;" and they authorize and request 
their attorney (Sewall), who was probably the informer, to 
procure " a coppy of the said act " and " receive what was 
allowed." The only act which answers this description is the 
" report." Neither the act now produced nor the manuscript 
draft of the act preserved in the Salem court files has any pro- 
vision or provisions "in favour of" the sufferers or their repre- 
sentatives " respecting their Estates ;" and nearly one half of 
those who signed the power of attorney soon discovered that 
whatever the action of the legislature had been, it was of no 
use or benefit to them. 

The wretched remnants of these poor families were unques- 
tionably much more deeply interested in their " Estates " than 
their " Reputations," as affected by the action of the legisla- 
ture; and the request for the "coppy of the act" was probably 
a part of the apparatus of the attorney for the increase of 
Ms compensation, — certainly not of their allowances. 

Mr. Goodell further calls attention to two distinct contem- 
poraneous references to this act. Samuel Wardwell addressed 
a petition to the Committee of Distribution sitting at Salem, 
Feb. 19, 1712, representing t that his mother's name " is not 
inserted in the late Act of the Generall Court, for the tak- 
ing off the Attainder," etc. He adds : " My mother being 
since deceased, I thought it my duty to endeavour that her 
name may have the benefit of that Act. I therefore humbly 
pray your Honours to Represent this case to the Honourable 
Gen 11 Court, that my mother's name may be inserted in the 


said Act." 1 He also desires further remuneration for losses 
and expenses by reason of the proceedings against his father 
and mother. 2 

Elizabeth Johnson, Jr., also presented a petition to the 
same committee, in which there are allusions to an " Act 
lately made by the General Court for taking off the Attain- 
der," in which her name was not inserted. " Being very 
desirous of the favour of that Act," she also prayed the 
committee to represent her case to the General Court at their 
next session, that her name might be inserted in the act, 
and also that the Honorable Court would make her some 
allowance, etc. 

Both these petitions have the same date of Feb. 19, 1712, 
— the date of meeting of the Committee of Distribution 
at Salem, at which, and perhaps by which, they appear to 
have been suggested ; and both refer to an act, as though 
incomplete, to which they desired additions. Their advisers, 
Sewall their attorney and the minister of Andover, in whose 
handwriting both petitions are said to be, certainly could 
not have suggested such modifications of, or additions to, a 
statute which was already a law of the land. Although 
their clients may have been as stupid and worthless as 
Calef and Hutchinson (probably following Calef) represent 
them, 3 neither Sewall nor the Andover minister was likely 
to blunder in that fashion. 

And these are all the references which I can hear of or dis- 
cover made by contemporaries or anybody else until the recent 
historians adopted the Salem manuscript as a genuine law of the 
Province, and followed each other blindly without any appar- 
ent critical examination whatever. They are all that have 
been produced or can be found, so far, as contemporaneous 
testimony to support the allegation that the bill became a 
law. They are also the only notices of any such legislation 
which have been found in all the history and materials of 

1 It is somewhat remarkable that this man was ignorant of the fact that his 
mother's name had received the benefit of the previous act of 1703. 

2 Records of Salem Witchcraft, vol. ii. pp. 241-421. 

3 Calef says of Mary Post and Elizabeth Johnson, Jr., that they were ("as 
appears by their behaviour) the most senseless and ignorant creatures that could 
be found." (p. 141.) Wardwell, the other petitioner, does not seem to have been 
any wiser. Hutchinson (vol. ii. p. 60) speaks of Post, Johnson, Jr., and Ward- 
well as " three of the worst characters," etc. 


history of Massachusetts from that day forward for more 
than a century. 

Now these references, so far from establishing the com- 
pleteness of the law, prove the contrary, and sustain the view 
which I have taken, — that it was unsatisfactory and incomplete. 
It may have been arrested at the stage in which the record 
leaves it, expressly because it was seen and known to be 
imperfect, — one third of the sufferers not mentioned at all, 
some restored a second time, names omitted, etc. In this 
view alone these petitions of Ward well and. Johnson become 
intelligible, — that as for several years before the matter had 
been taken up and then "allowed to subside," in alternate fits 
of progress and dehvv, there was still an opportunity for 
inserting names in a future revision before the bill should 
become a law; and when the subject might be again before the 
legislature, it was hoped that further provision would be made 
in the way of remuneration. 

In style and method, and literary treatment altogether, this 
act is without any parallel which I am able to recall in the 
legislation of Massachusetts or any other government. It is 
slovenly and inaccurate. Two places are left blank where 
the name of the wife of poor Giles Corey should appear 
twice, although it is correctly given in the same report of 
the committee from which the list is said to have been copied 
into the act, so that the negligence with which Mr. Goodell 
taxes the Committee of Award and Distribution — with justice, 
no doubt — must also be charged upon the authors of this bill 
in the legislature. It would be easy to multiply doubts sug- 
gested by its imperfections. These are such as greatly impair 
its substance and value as compared with its originally avowed 
purpose. It is imperfect, it is insufficient, notwithstanding its 
prolonged delays in preparation and postponements of action ; 
in short, it is just such a bill as I should not expect Joseph 
Dudley to approve or consent to, — not only a Governor, but 
a Chief Justice who had experienced a review of his own 
doings in New York when Jacob Leisler's attainder was 
reversed by an act of Parliament (the only authority com- 
petent to pass such a law), — an act which has some features 
in common with that under discussion, — the historical pre- 
amble being untrue, and the reversal of the attainder of 
no value except as a motive and makeweight towards a 



liberal indemnity to be sought from a subsequent New York 

I have alluded to the Parliament of Great Britain as the 
only authority in all the British Dominions competent to pass 
a law reversing an attainder. This was not only the fact, but 
the mode of procedure always required that the royal assent 
should be previously obtained. 1 The exceptional character 
of bills for restitution of honors and blood has always been 
notable in parliamentary law. They are to this day first 
signed by the Queen, and are presented by a lord to the House 
of Peers by command of the crown, after which they pass 
through the ordinary stages and are sent to the Commons. 
Here the Queen's consent must be signified before the first 
reading; and if this form be overlooked all the proceedings 
will be null and void. After the second reading, the bill is 
committed to several members specially nominated, with " all 
the members of the House who are of her Majesty's most 
honorable privy council, and all the gentlemen of the long 
robe." Such bills receive the royal assent in the usual form, 
as public bills. 2 The " laws of England " in the tenth 3'ear 
of the reign of Queen Anne were certainly no less stringent 
than in these later years of Queen Victoria ; and I think it 
would have puzzled the authorities of Massachusetts in 1711 
to conceal, explain, or justify the manifest "repugnancy" of 
such an act as the one in question to English laws and Eng- 
lish ways of making and administering them. 

In the forms of procedure the doings of the Great and 
General Court were largely modelled upon those of the 
imperial legislature ; and curious parallels may be discerned 
between the grand councils of the realm, organized and con- 
ducted at Westminster with all the pomp and ceremony be- 
fitting the representation of an ancient monarchy, and those 
of their humbler imitators on the edge of the Western Conti- 
nent, between the forests and the sea. 

Half a century later than the period to which our discussion 
refers, with the Sugar Act, the Stamp Act, and the Boston 
Port Bill almost in view before them, the Massachusetts 

1 Hatsell's Precedents, vol. iii. p. 337. " The purport of some bills must neces- 
sarily be communicated to the king, even before they are presented; as bills for 
the reversal of attainders," etc. 

2 May's Law of Parliament, 8th ed., pp. 832, 833, and authorities cited. 


House of Representatives declared : " We shall at all Times 
think it our highest Honor and Happiness to make the Pro- 
ceedings of the British Parliament our Example." j 

I am not aware that any attempts were made # by other 
colonies or provinces of Great Britain to pass acts to reverse 
attainders, — a proceeding which involved so direct an invasion 
of the prerogatives of king and Parliament 2 that even Massa- 
chusetts might have hesitated. It is measurably certain that 
neither the act of 1703 nor this alleged act of 1711 ever came 
under the notice of the Privy Council ; for any knowledge of 
either of them would surely have commanded the attention of 
the crown lawyers, and elicited prompt and emphatic dis- 
approval. 3 

Of course the fact that the General Court of Massachusetts 
had no right to pass such an act is no evidence that they 
refrained from the attempt; but Dudley must have known 
what were the methods and precedents of the law of England 
and practice of Parliament ; and although he signed the act 
of 1703, he had an opportunity to be reminded of his duty 
as a servant of the crown between that year and 1711. I have 
already alluded to his connection with the judicial murders of 
Leisler and Milborne at New York in 1691. The attainder of 
Leisler was reversed, with all these customary formalities closely 
and minutely observed, in 1695. Dudley himself was at that 
time in London, and one of the witnesses in the examinations 
by the Parliamentary Committee. 

When under a new governor in New York the Leisler 

1 Journal: 1762-63, p. 144. 

2 "Not even the king's pardon can restore or purify the blood ; nothing but 
the high and transcendent power of Parliament." — BJackstone, bk. iv. cap. 31. 

3 An instance of the assertion of the royal prerogative in Massachusetts oc- 
curred in 1725 upon occasion of an attempt to promote a synod or assembly of the 
clergy. It was regarded as certain, in point of law, that the royal supremacy 
in ecclesiastical affairs, being a branch of the prerogative, took place in the 
Province, and that synods could not be held, nor was it lawful for the clergy to 
assemble as in a synod, without the royal license. The application, therefore, to 
the General Court which was then made was declared by the crown lawyers to be 
a contempt of his Majesty's prerogative, and the Lieutenant-Governor was rebuked 
for his failure to withstand and reject it instead of subscribing his consent as he 
had done. He was further directed to signify to those who had been active in 
the design that such an assembly was against law, and they should forbear to 
meet, on penalty of prosecution, by information, for a misdemeanor. The synod 
was not held. Chalmers's Opinions, vol. i. p. 12. Cf. Hutchinson, vol. ii. pp. 
322, 323. 


party gained the ascendancy, they signalized their revenge by 
turning the tables on their opponents, and new state trials 
resulted in the condemnation of Colonel Nicholas Bayard 
and Alderman John Hutchins to the same punishment which 
had been inflicted on Leisler and Milborne. They escaped 
the penalties, however, to which they had been exposed ; and 
in 1703 the legislature of the Province dealt with the case 
in a fashion which might well have furnished instruction to 
Dudley. So far from attempting to reverse attainders by 
the act of a provincial legislature, they passed an act declar- 
ing the illegality of the proceedings against Bayard and 
Hutchins, and did not even presume to do that without the 
permission of the crown duly signified, as it is recited in the 
act, viz. : — 

" Which matters having been fully heard and Examiued before Her 
Most Sacred Majesty in Council at the Court at St. James's the 24th 
Day of January, 1702, upon Consideration thereof, Her Majesty being 
sensible of the Undue and Illegal Proceedings against the said Bayard 
and Hutchins, was then most graciously pleased in Her Royal Justice 
and Bounty, to order that her Attorney General here should be directed 
to consent to the Reversing those Sentences, and to whatever else may 
be requisite in the Law for the Re-instating the said Bayard and 
Hutchins in their Honour and Property, as if no such Prosecution had 
been." 1 

Let us consider further the construction and contents of the 
bill in question. It affirms as a fact that in 1692 " several towns 
within this Province were infested with a horrible Witchcraft 
or Possession of Devils," and makes a very emphatic and 
significant record of the reason why after a time a stop was 
put to the prosecutions, in the statement of a great dissatis- 
faction when they reached " Persons of known and good rep- 
utation." They then thought it necessary to appeal to their 
Majesties the King and Queen. Their victims had no chance 
to appeal, and their only ground of appeal was from the 
probable consequences of their own madness and folly. The 
result of that representation is stated to have been a letter 
from Queen Mary the Second, bearing date the 15th of April, 
1693, the terms of which as given might with justice be 
regarded as a supplement to the famous " Advice of the 

i Act of 19th June, 1703, MS. 


Ministers" 1 while the delusion was raging, and would have 
been of precious little value to those who were accused if 
the storm of this tyranny and wickedness had not already 
been long overpast. 

The preaniblers go on to say, as the last of their incoherent 
and rambling apology, that "some of the Principal Accusers 
and Witnesses in those dark and severe Prosecutions have 
since discovered themselves to be Persons of Profligate and 
Vicious Conversation." The fact that they were so was per- 
fectly well known from the beginning. They were the "vile 
varlets " of whom Robert Calef pungently reminded the cham- 
pions of the witchcraft delusion when he so courageously 
encountered the wrathful indignation and unparalleled abuse 
of the great protagonist of that fearful drama, — Cotton 
Mather. 2 ' 

In accordance with the report of the committee, as I have 
already stated it, the enactment provided for the reversal of 
the attainders against twenty-two of the sufferers, omitting 
nine of them, of whom two had been relieved by the act of 
1703, so that seven still remained attaint, apparently, though 
of course not in fact, liable to the pains and penalties to which 
they had been condemned. One who had been relieved by the 
act of 1703 was also included in this act. As all the survivors 
had been pardoned by the Governor, the statement in the act 
that they were " lying still under the like Sentence of the said 

1 This '• Advice of the Ministers " was upon inquiry about the matter of spec- 
tral evidence. It was artfully framed to turn the edge of avowed opposition to 
the use of so dangerous an instrument of conviction. It was eminently Jesuitical ; 
and its positive direction was to approve and justify all that had been done, and 
stimulate the actors to the zealous prosecution of their deadly work. There is an 
interesting volume in the Library of the Massachusetts Historical Society, which 
has been neglected, although well deserving attention. It is a copy of Cotton 
Mather's " Magnalia," with manuscript notes by his brother, the Rev. Samuel 
Mather, of Witney, Oxfordshire, England, who graduated at Harvard in 1690. 
It was apparently intended for an abridgment of the work and publication as such. 
Samuel Mather having been "on the spot when these things were transacted," — 
that is, present in Massachusetts at the time of the Salem witchcraft proceed- 
ings, his summary of them, though concise, is very valuable. He regarded the 
evidence for some of the prodigies as being so conclusive that one might as 
well doubt the existence of such a province as New England. He attributes 
the interruption of the proceedings to Governor Phips, saying: "Sir William 
perceiving that spectral evidence was not to be credited, a stop was put to sanguinary 

2 Calef, Preface, p. vi. 


Court and liable to have the same Executed upon them " was 
simply false. 

By far the most important provision of the whole act, and 
in fact the only one which would have been of any substantial 
value to anybody, was the concluding paragraph, by which all 
the officials of every grade who had been concerned in these 
outrages got their quietus and protection against " prosecution 
in the law." 

We come now to the document itself, — the actual printed 
paper. 1 It is a single leaf, and to the practised eye, familiar 
with the fashion of printing the laws in those days, it presents 
every external aspect of genuineness. Indeed, I find it diffi- 
cult to doubt that it was printed with the types of Bartholo- 
mew Green, and ornamented at the head with his new cut 
of the Royal Arms, which replaced its old, worn-out predeces- 
sor in that very year (1713). 

But the black-letter type on the left — the next thing which 
strikes the eye — presents an uncommon appearance, both in 
the words and in the arrangement. It would be difficult to 
show anything like it in any other page-heading among all the 
laws in print. It was not customary to use those words, 
" Province of the Massachusetts Bay*" before the general title, 
caption, or session heading which always preceded the titles of 
the several acts, whether one or more. The use of the black 
letter in the words 4 ' New England," "Boston," and "October" 
is also unusual. They were always in italics in the regular 
issues from that press. The date, too, of the day of meeting is 
given in Arabic numerals, which in the regular issues was 
always printed out in full Roman letters, e.g. "seventeenth," 
not "17th." 

And here we reach the point of demonstration which not 
only justifies the suspicions already hinted at, but proves con- 
clusively that this paper was printed not only for a purpose 
apart from the usual order and method of printing the laws, 
but also under the direction of some one not familiar with the 
routine of the office and ignorant of the details of the author- 
ized official work of that press. The caption, which sets forth 
the authority of what is to follow, reads thus : — 

1 See the fae-simile of the "Act of 1711," accompanying Mr. Goodell's paper 
in the Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, June, 1883, p. 285. 


"An Act, Made and Passed by the Great and General Court or 
Assembly of Her Majesty's Province of the Massachusetts- Bay in 
Nefo^nglantJ, Held at Boston the 17th day of ©ctober, 1711." 

The usual form would have been as follows : — 

•' An Act, passed by the Great and General Court or Assembly of Her 
Majesties Province of the Massachusetts- Bay in New England: 
Begun and Held at Boston upon Wednesday the Thirtieth Day of 
May, 1711. And continued by several Prorogations and Adjourn- 
ments unto Wednesday, the Seventeenth of October following, and 
then met." 

In the first the words " Made and " before " Passed " are not 
to be found in the caption of any contemporary publication of 
any other act, nor indeed in that of any publication of any 
other act or acts during the entire provincial period. I doubt 
whether it can be found in that of any copy of any act any- 
where, excepting in the manuscript from which it was taken, 
to which I shall shortly refer again. The word "Majesty's" 
is correctly spelled, which had never been done before in the 
caption of any printed act of the Province of Massachusetts ; 
for it was invariably spelled " Majesties" throughout the whole 
of the reign of Queen Anne, having been continued from the 
time of William and Mary and William III. without any alter- 
ation of this unmistakable tradition of Bartholomew Green's 
types until 1715, when the accession of George I. compelling 
the change of " Her " to " His " may have challenged the 
attention of the Secretary or the printer to the plural pos- 
sessive. Even then it was not without difficulty that the new 
way finally triumphed. However this may have been, the fact 
is obvious that neither Mr. Secretary Addington nor Mr. 
Printer Green prepared the copy or read or revised the proof 
of the leaf before us. This is further shown by the remain- 
ing difference between the two captions, which is even more 
remarkable than those already mentioned. The regular official 
form invariably set forth the beginning of the Court, as well 
as its continuance, when the act or acts were of any other 
meeting or session than the first, In this case no notice is 
taken of either beginning or continuance of the Court, but 
the statement relates solely to the holding of what was in fact 


the fifth session, with date of its beginning alone, — the session 
during which the act is alleged to have been passed. 

I have already pointed out the fatal defects in the Salem 
manuscript' which deprive it of authority as a sufficient record 
or copy of a record. A comparison of this printed paper with 
that manuscript will show that they are almost identical, and 
must stand or fall together. The manuscript furnished the 
text for the printer. No man can trace any other original. 

Whoever procured the printing of this act, and whatever 
may have been the motive for it, it is apparent that either 
there was no application to the proper officer for an authorized 
copy of record, or if one was made, that it was unsuccessful. 
No legitimate beneficiary under such a law, wishing to publish 
it or avail himself of its provisions, would have failed to secure 
an exemplified copy ; and the act itself, even if not technically 
a public act, 1 covered too many interests and would have 
commanded too wide an extent of public sympathy to have 
been forgotten. The inferences are obvious. There was no 
such law in the Secretary's office. The printing of this paper 
was surreptitious. The conclusion is irresistible. No such 
act became a law in 1711. 

But there is a still more important argument to be noticed 
against the possible existence of this alleged law. It does not 
appear to have been known to anybody, even those who were 
most interested in the subject, until a comparatively recent 
period. Hutchinson, your great historian, evidently knew 
nothing whatever of the existence of any such law, although 
he was well acquainted with and mentions in his History 2 the 
" grants made for and in consideration of the losses sustained," 
etc., in the same year (1711), shown by the record preserved 
in the report of the Committee of Awards, with which we are 
now familiar. 

The extracts printed in the Appendix to my Notes, etc., of 
proceedings in various years down to 1750, militate strongly 
against the genuineness of the act. I found no allusion to it 
in any of the petitions or legislative action thereon from the 
time when Philip English made his demand for redress in 
1717 onward. 

1 If this act was a public act, my position is firmly sustained by the fact that 
it was not printed at the time with the other public acts of the same session. 

2 Vol. ii. p. 62, note. 


In 1737, when the Rev. Israel Loring, pastor of a church in 
Sudbury, preached the Election Sermon, he revived the subject 
with great boldness and vigor, insisting on the duty of that 
generation in the matter : — 

" Now," said he, " though the loss of Parents cannot be made up to 
their surviving Posterity, yet their Estates may ; And the Question is 
(if it be not beyond all Question) whether a Restitution is not due from 
the Publick to them, and we are not bound in Justice to make it. 
Hereby Infamy may be taken off from the Names and Memory of such 
as were Executed, and who it may be did not in the least deserve it ; 
as well as a Reparation made to their children for the injuries done 
them; who remain to this day among us in mean, low, and abject 

When the House of Representatives initiated proceedings 
in the next year (1738), following the direction indicated by 
Loring's strong advice, it does not appear that they knew any- 
thing about the act of 1711. If there ever was any such law 
of Massachusetts, the roll in parchment under the Province 
Seal must have been at that time in the Secretary's office, in 
the same building in which their session was held ; but 
instead of calling for its production and having it laid on the 
table before them by the Secretary, that they might see for 
themselves " who was y e sufferers," they instituted a corre- 
spondence with the officials in charge of the Salem records. 
At the same time their doings indicate some knowledge of the 
previous grants of money, but not the slightest recollection of 
the formal legislation which we are now called upon to accept 
as complete and genuine. 

Governor Belcher, in 1740, renewed the effort in an earnest 
speech, in which he declared to the legislature : "I really 
think there is something incumbent on this Government to be 
done, for retrieving the Estates and Reputations of the Posterities 
of the unhappy Families that so suffered," etc. 

The stirring appeal of Parson Loring and the emphatic 
official statement of Governor Belcher alike bear testimony 
against this act. They could not have been uttered by men 
who knew of the existence of such a law. Yet Loring was 
born in 1682, and graduated at Harvard College in 1701, and 
probably was never out of Massachusetts for any consider- 
able time to the day of his death in 1772. Belcher, born a 


year earlier (1681) and graduating two years earlier (1699), 
although absent in Europe for several years after leaving 
college, returned long before the agitation of the subject in 
the legislature, which is said to have resulted in the final 
enactment of the statute in question. Both were contempora- 
ries, and could not have failed to be interested contemporaries, 
of the men and events of the witchcraft period itself and the 
following half-century. Their childhood was shadowed by the 
immediate traditions of the Devil and his works in Salem, 
and their manhood was haunted by the recollection of the 
sorrow and sufferings of the victims and their families. No 
man lived in Massachusetts from 1692 to 1750 who could have 
forgotten such a vindication of the witches, if it had ever 
been consummated. 

That they did not forget is plainly shown by the language 
which I have quoted, and the fashion in which, after so many 
years of neglect and indifference, they demanded justice for 
the representatives of the victims of that infernal delusion, — 
that infamy might be taken off the names and memory of 
such as were executed, — that their reputations as well as 
their estates might be retrieved. 

In the legislatures to which these appeals were addressed 
there were many, doubtless, who were old enough themselves 
to recall the thrilling incidents of the witchcraft period, and 
those assemblies were full of men familiar from personal knowl- 
edge or household traditions with everything which had been 
done, and especially much that had been proposed but not 
done, — a neglect which some of them evidently sought to 
amend. It is plain that these men did not think what had 
been done was sufficient, or that the aggregate of the appro- 
priations of 1711 was an adequate compensation to the repre- 
sentatives of those who had suffered. They were not satisfied 
with what had been done. Doubtless there were great differ- 
ences of opinion among the people. There must have been a 
powerful party in the legislature determined against further 
action. The struggle continued at intervals till the middle of 
the century, when, in 1750, the last recorded effort failed even 
to secure the attention of the committee to which it was re- 
ferred. Mr. Goodell says of this committee : " It is not too 
harsh to say that it was their duty, in 1750, to report against 
reconsidering a claim which had been fairly settled, and the 


reopening of which would have furnished a precedent for a 
general and formidable assault upon the Province treasury." 
But they do not appear to have made any such report or anv 
other report, or even to have met for consideration of the mat- 
ter. Although they were reminded of their duty by a reso- 
lution of the House of Representatives, months after their 
appointment, " directing them to sit forthwith, consider the 
petition to them committed, and report as soon as may be," I 
have not been able to learn that they did either sit, consider, 
or report, so that my friend's justification of their report may, 
without offence, be considered as superfluous. 

The existence, then, of the alleged statute of 1711 remains 
to be proved. It is unnecessary to waste time in fruitless 
speculations about probabilities, or conjectures about things 
hidden or not revealed. " De non apparentibus et non existen- 
tibus, eadem est ratio" Until some authority can be made to 
appear for the fact of completion of that law by due consent 
of the Governor, impress of the Province Seal, and formal 
publication, it cannot properly be said to have existed at 
any time as a law, and its counterfeit presentment must be 
relegated to the limbo of imperfect legislation, or that histori- 
cal house of correction which, we are told, is paved with good 

Let the cabinet in which its remains may be preserved bear 
the inscription Tantum non lex — requiescat. 

It remains for you, Gentlemen, who are surrounded by the 
materials out of which must come the final determination of 
this and all other doubtful questions in the history of Massa- 
chusetts, to stretch forth your hands and set them fitly in 
order, with authority that all shall recognize and none may 
gainsay ; so that we whose dwellings are remote from these 
sacred and perennial fountains, may come up from time' to 
time out of the lands of the Gentiles, by the coasts beyond 
Jordan, slake our thirst without doubt or misgiving, and go 
our way rejoicing. 

Mr. Goodell, after the reading of the foregoing paper had 
been concluded, remarked: — 

As might have been expected, our learned and ingenious 
associate has given us all that can be shown or surmised in 



support of his original proposition, that the act of 1711 never 
became a law ; and yet it seems to me that, fairly weighed 
against what has been shown on the other side, his arguments 
do not preponderate. 

Admiration of the skill with which he hurled some of his 
shafts, to say nothing of a sense of peril, quite distracted my 
attention from some other of his points, made with equal 
felicity of expression. In short, I feel overborne by the tor- 
rent of eloquence to which we have listened, and am con- 
scious of inability to rally, for the moment, so as to do justice 
to him or myself. 

But let us glance at the issue as it stands. To remove a 
doubt never entertained until Dr. Moore denied the existence 
of the act in question, but which, starting from such a source, 
merits the most careful consideration, I have shown, first, 
from the journals of the Governor and Council, commonly 
called the " General Court Records," an entry of the passage, 
of the bill in question, to be enacted ; second, I have referred 
to a contemporaneous copy, in the handwriting of the Secretary 
of the Province, filed in the office of the Clerk of the Courts, at 
Salem, where it has remained since 1711 ; third, I have called 
attention to three contemporaneous references to this act, by 
different parties interested ;* and, fourth, I have produced, as 
the final test, a copy of the act, printed on a single leaf in 
the year 1713, — which copy, it is admitted, bears on its face 
conclusive evidence of having been impressed from the types 
of Bartholomew Green, then printer to the Governor and 

Now, to invalidate the last of these concurrent evidences, 
which taken together impress me as decisive, my friend, here, 

1 Dr. Moore infers (p. 88, ante) that, because in two of these instances the 
petitioners pray that certain names may be "inserted in the act," the act had not 
heen actually passed. But this is hardly a necessary inference, since the act and 
an act in addition thereto would, by legal construction, constitute but one act; 
and therefore it is not difficult to conceive that the " advisers " of the petitioners 
may have seen no impropriety in suggesting such " modification of, or addition to, 
a statute which was already a law of the land." Again, both of the petitioners 
describe the act either as " the late act/' or " the act lately made ; " and one of 
them expressly prays that application may be made, " at the next session " of the 
General Court, to have her name inserted. Now what is the purpose of an act 
in addition, etc., but to make "modifications of, or additions to," some statute 
already enacted? And is there any rule limiting the operation of such an act 
so as to exclude the insertion of additional names ? 


asks you to believe that the act, of which we have a heliotype 
ia our Proceedings, wa 1 surreptitiously printed. lie docs not 
suggest the motive, nor indicate with certainty the possible 
author of this deed. Perhaps he would have us believe that 
it was done by the printer's devil, to mark the end of an in- 
vidious rivalry with the recently dethroned Prince of Darkness, 
and to celebrate the absoluteness of his own less vindictive, 
though not always less provoking sway. However, I do not 
intend to carry my criticism beyond the sure support of incon- 
trovertible facts. I am even willing to admit that I cannot 
conceive how the critical reasons for questioning the authen- 
ticity of the printed copy could be more ably or thoroughly 
presented than they have been in the paper just read; and yet 
I feel confident they do not in your minds overcome the strong 
presumption arising from the mutually corroborating circum- 
stances which attest the genuineness of this copy, and from the 
absence of any conceivable motive for perpetrating the high- 
handed forgery which the alleged clandestine operations with 
Bartholomew Green's types would imply. 

I will not then attempt to follow the critical argument in 
detail, but content myself with calling your attention to a fact 
which, if clearly borne in mind, may serve to lessen the rigor 
of the rules by which the argument should be conducted. It 
is not pretended that the printed act was one of a series of acts 
published by authority ; but, on the contrary, it is assumed to 
have been printed, a }^ear or two after its passage, probably to 
meet the demands of persons interested, who could not be so 
conveniently and cheaply supplied with manuscript copies. 

Although bills of attainder after the Revolution of 1688 
were considered public acts, — notwithstanding they had ceased 
to be of the nature of conclusive judgments, as formerly, but 
were in terms conditional and in their operation dependent 
upon some future act of the accused or some prospective 
judicial proceeding against him, — bills to reverse or set aside 
attainders were classed with private acts, both in Old and 
New England. 1 

Nothing, therefore, against the existence of such an act 

1 This was the case with the bills annulling the attainders of Lord Russell, 
Algernon Sidney, and Lady Alice Lisle (1 W. & M., 1st sess.) ; and with the pro- 
vincial act, referred to by Dr. Moore, reversing the attainder of Abigail Faulkner 
and others, passed in 1703. 


should be inferred from the fact that it does not appear in the 
first volume of the new edition of the Province Laws, since, 
according to the arrangement announced by the editors in their 
preface, 1 it properly belongs in the appendix, with other pri- 
vate acts, including the similar act of 1703. The title of this 
act does not, indeed, appear in the list of titles of private acts 
in that volume, and for the reasons I have heretofore given ; 2 
but upon Mr. Sainsbury's discovery of printed copies of the 
missing public acts of the same year, respecting which, in the 
matter of the Governor's assent, the record was similarly 
defective, it was immediately put in the list of titles of private 
acts reserved for the appendix, although it was too late to 
make the proper change in the printed volume. This was 
done in the hope that before the appendix should be printed, 
the certainty of the act's having been passed would be estab- 
lished ; which happened, to the satisfaction of the editors, 
when the printed copy in question, exactly corresponding with 
the manuscript copy at Salem, came to their knowledge. 

The fact that it was a private act should also cause us to 
treat with distrust any arguments against its genuineness 
founded upon discrepancies, in formal and typographical 
details, between this copy and the public acts printed in the 
regular series. There being no absolute or customary standard 
for private as well as for public acts, all those departures from 
uniformity which have been disclosed by the expert scrutiny 
of Dr. Moore are not shown to be less compatible with honesty 
on the part of the person or persons who printed or procured 
the printing of this copy, than is the absence of page-numbers, 
or than would be the presence of any peculiarity in the signa- 
ture, paper, or press-work. 

The same circumstance, moreover, weakens the force of 
another objection which Dr. Moore appears to think, if not 
insuperable, at least formidable ; and that is, that the act in 
question does not appear to have been laid before the ministers 
of the crown. Private acts, not being regularly printed, 
often failed, possibly sometimes on that account, to reach the 
Privy Council. This is evident from the demands occasionally 
made for exemplifications of such acts, upon the Governor or 
the Secretary of the Province, by the Lords of Trade or from 
the Council Board. Hence less importance should be attached 

1 Page xxviii. 2 Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc, vol. xx. p. 290. 


to the failure to discover the mention of any particular private 
act in the Public Record Office, Besides, to insist on the 
importance of such a defect is to apply a rule which will 
equally unsettle the authenticity of several public acts. For 
instance, since no list of the acts of 1711 has been found in 
the British archives, — if, indeed, any such list was actually 
transmitted, — the proof of the passage of three of the public 
acts of that year must rest upon the existence of a printed 
copy or copies ; for this, meagre as it may seem, is all the evi- 
dence that we have of the fact that these acts really passed 
the Province seal. Now, if this evidence is inadmissible, the 
acts must fall ; there being no record showing that the Gov- 
ernor assented to them, and neither the original bill nor the 
engrossment of either having been preserved. 

Yet Dr. Moore says these " are known to have been printed 
contemporaneously, in due course, and by regular official au- 
thority." lie fails, however, to add that this knowledge is 
derived from precisely the same kind of evidence upon which 
I claim to found my knowledge of the passage of the act to 
reverse the attainders. And while he informs us that two of 
these acts are in the supplements of the edition of 1C99, he 
modestly refrains from telling us that only one perfect collec- 
tion of these supplements exists, which he, its fortunate pos- 
sessor, esteems an adequate reward for the expense of time 
and money, and for the great learning and ingenuity with 
which for many years his bibliographical researches for its 
completion were conducted. 

Surely our friend's comparison of the " status " of the act 
for reversing the attainders with that of other acts — for in- 
stance, the act for enforcing the order of June 12, 1711 — 
should have been extended beyond the bare declaration, in 
five words, with which he disposes of the former. The 
category of each is identical ; and if one is to be summarily 
" relegated to the limbo of imperfect legislation," he should 
show with all possible cogency of reasoning and fulness of 
illustration sufficient grounds for exempting the public act 
from the same fate. The difficulty of the task should rather 
have induced than excused the attempt ; for we cannot be 
presumed to know what circumstance in favor of the public 
act overbalances, in his mind, the cumulative evidence afforded 
by the presence, legitimately, in a public office, of a contem- 


poraneous copy of the private act in the handwriting of the 
Secretary of the Province and by him indorsed " Copy," and 
minuted " examined," while not a scrap is referred to indi- 
cating that the public act was ever officially recognized. 

I shall say something more on this head presently, after I 
have considered the objections which Dr. Moore discovers on 
the face of the printed act. 

I am content to allow his criticisms upon the "style and 
method and literary treatment" of the act to pass for what 
they are worth, with the single observation, which I 'think he 
will approve, that of all literature in the world statute-books 
of the early part of the last century are the least likely to afford 
specimens of elegant diction, and that the frequent occurrence 
of acts to amend and explain those, early statutes sufficiently 
attests the crudeness of the efforts of the average law-maker 
of that day, both in Old and New England, to frame his bills 
so as to express his intentions with ordinary certainty. 

Therefore, after remarking, in order to show its slight sig- 
nificance, that the omission of the Christian name of Good wife 
Corey was a piece of carelessness which, though unusual, can 
be capped by grosser instances even in the public acts of a 
much later day, 1 I proceed to examine the more important 
internal evidence which Dr. Moore points out as tending to 
prove the spuriousness of the act. 

And, first, of the improbability of the passage of this act 
by the General Court, because the subject-matter belonged 
exclusively to the cognizance of Parliament. If Dr. Moore's 
views respecting the exclusive authority of Parliament to pass 
bills reversing attainders were well grounded — which I do 
not admit — he himself furnishes me with a conclusive answer- 
in the present case, where he says : u Of course the fact that 
the General Court of Massachusetts had no right to pass such 
an act is no evidence that they refrained from the attempt," — 
an opinion admirably sustained by their passing, eight years 
before, the act to reverse the attainders of Abigail Faulkner 
and others, which our friend has printed, at length, in the 
appendix to his Notes on the History of Witchcraft, etc. It 
is therefore unnecessary to discuss the constitutionality of the 
act, which, by the way, was not questioned by the Solicitor- 

1 For instance, Prov. Laws, 1757-58, chap. 15; 1760-61, chap. 7; and 1768, 
chap. 16, § 1. 


General of England when the act of 1703 was laid before him 
by command of the Lords of Trade, — a proceeding which 
Dr. Moore too hastily assumes could not have happened. 

Nor need we inquire what differences in the organic law of 
the respective provinces of New York and Massachusetts Bay, 
or in the political ideas which prevailed in those provinces, or 
what dissimilarity in the special circumstances of any given 
case, may at any time have induced the legislatures of the two 
provinces to differ in their action. But it may be observed 
that in both provinces at that time the supremacy of Parlia- 
ment was generally recognized. Its power, if not its right, 
to meddle, temporarily at least, with the internal affairs of 
either province, and even to disregard the qualified autonomy 
granted by the charter of Massachusetts, was not denied 
except by a very small party, constituting, however, the germ 
which slowly expanded into that resistless band of patriots 
which succeeded to power and glory in the Revolution. Nor 
should I omit to say that Dudley's change of opinion between 
the time of his signing the act of 1703 and the culmination of 
the movement for redressing the grievances of 1692 is not to 
be taken for granted. 

Dr. Moore discovers another badge of spuriousness in the 
declaration, in the preamble of the act, that the survivors were 
"lying still under the like Sentence of the said Court and 
liable to have the same Executed upon them," which, he says, 
is false, inasmuch as the survivors had all been pardoned. Of 
course he does not mean to have us understand that the 
preamble expressly puts all the survivors in this category by 
the word "others," which, as the context shows, may have 
been intended to embrace only a few of the persons convicted 
and sentenced, — that is, "attainted." 

But how many pardons were actually granted ? and where 
is the record evidence? When were the charters of pardon 
pleaded ? or in what manner were they communicated after 
sentence? Has my friend any other evidence that pardons 
were granted than the declarations of Mather and Calef, and 
the representations of some of the petitioners for redress ? If 
he has, he ought to have adduced it to support his charge of 
falsehood. If he has not, we are bound to challenge the 
correctness of the inference he would force upon us, that all 
the survivors were pardoned. 



Of the witnesses I have referred to, Calef alone implies 
that all the surviving convicts were pardoned ; but the 
unsupported testimony of all of them would be entirely 
insufficient to prove that Governor Phips violated his instruc- 
tions and set an example which was never followed by his 

The pardon of felonies was a prerogative of the crown which 
could only be delegated by express language ; 2 and if pardons 
were granted by the Governor without such authority, the act 
was ultra vires. The authority has not been shown here. Hut- 
chinson, who understood the law relating to this branch of the 
prerogative, does not pretend that Phips pardoned any of the 
condemned. His words are : " Those the governor reprieved, 
for the King's mercy." 2 Undoubtedly, as Hutchinson says, the 
three persons 3 convicted at the January term of the Superior 
Court of Judicature at Salem were reprieved ; and some of 
the accused perhaps were pardoned after a reprieve, by royal 
charter or mandate, as appears to have been the case with 
Abigail Faulkner, who had been attainted by the Court of 
Oyer and Terminer. But what evidence is there that all the 
other attainted persons were pardoned? And if they were 
not pardoned, the statement in the preamble remains unshaken 
by this attempt to impeach it. 4 

But Dr. Moore goes further, and declares that neither the 
printed act nor the manuscript copy at Salem " has any 
provision or provisions 4 in favour of ' the sufferers or their 
representatives, 4 respecting their Estates.' " 

I hardly know how to account for this assertion ; it is so 

1 See Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc, vol. xx. p. 148, and note. 

2 Vol. ii. p. 61. 

8 Dr. Moore's quotation from Hutchinson respecting the characters of these 
persons is liable, as separated by him from the context, to be misunderstood. The 
historian is not comparing them with the whole world, but with their companions. 
If they were thus, relatively, " the worst characters," they may still have been 
very decent people, as, in point of fact, I believe they were. See ante, p. 88, 
n. 3. 

4 The "pardon" which Calef refers to, and the "discharge" mentioned by 
others, were probably one and the same thing. Hutchinson gives us an idea of 
the blind deference paid to persons in authority, in the romantic incident which 
he relates of the release of a prisoner by the Governor's lady, who forged a 
warrant to accomplish her purpose with the prison-keeper. The story, which 
seems to be true, justifies the inference that the Governor was supposed to 
have unlimited authority in the matter of discharging prisoners. Hence, too, the 
peculiarity of the final jail-delivery on which Hutchinson briefly comments. 


directly at variance with what I had supposed every lawyer 
would frankly admit was the inseparable incident of attainders 
everywhere throughout the realm and the dominions of Eng- 
land. Would our friend have us believe that no forfeiture 
and no escheat followed the attainders of 1G92 ? If so, here 
again I am compelled to confess my ignorance of his authority, 
and to express my regret that he has passed over the subject 
so lightly in his paper. 

We must not lose sight of the fact that all who suffered the 
extreme penalty of the law in 1692 were condemned before 
the passage of the act "setting forth general privileges," by 
which escheats and forfeitures in cases of felony were abol- 
ished, and that this act was subsequently disallowed by the 
Privy Council because of this very clause which was declared 
by them to be "repugnant to the laws of England." 1 That 
act was not made retroactive expressly or by necessary 

Now, whatever may have been the practice in this province 
after the passage of this act, and however convincing now 
appear to us the reasons that may be offered to show that a 
similar provision in the colonial " Body of Liberties '• was 
operative under the new charter, it is certain that neither in 
Massachusetts nor at Whitehall did the notion at that time 
prevail that the "lands and heritages" of the condemned were 
exempt from forfeiture and escheat. Moreover, the act clearly 
contains nothing to prevent the " corruption of blood." 

For my own part, I know of no reason for doubting that 
the attainders following the judgments pronounced against 
the persons convicted of witchcraft by the Court of Oyer and 
Terminer not only involved the forfeiture of all lands and other 
corporeal hereditaments, " for a year and a day, and waste," 
but that the real estate of the condemned escheated to the 
king, who, by the tenure of "free and common socage," as of 
the royal " Manor of East Greenwich," under which all lands 
in Massachusetts were held, was the immediate lord. This 
escheat, moreover, though not strictly a forfeiture, was an 
absolute sequestration of the realty; and, notwithstanding no 
actual entry may have been made, upon information or other- 

1 See note to 1692-93, chap. 11 in vol. i. of Province Laws ; also Proc. Mass. 
Hist. Soc, vol. xx. p. 282, note |. 


wise, and no record of "office found " J remains, the estates of 
those who were attainted were, according to the maxim 
Nullum tempus occurrit regi, forever liable to seizure unless 
a pardon specially restoring the escheated lands should be 
granted by the crown, or unless the attainder should be 
removed by an act of the legislature. 

Until the enactment of a proper bill of reversal and res- 
titution, however, the blood of the condemned remained 
" corrupted," so that neither could he be the vehicle for the 
transmission of property by descent, nor his posterity take 
from him by inheritance. A pardon, whatever effect it might 
have had when granted with apt words and a special design 
to waive the escheat, could never avail to restore the for- 
feiture, or purge the blood of its " corruption." 

Citations might be multiplied almost infinitely to show the 
utter insufficiency of a pardon from the king himself to avoid 
the consequences of attainder. In the language of Black- 
stone, which Dr. Moore has quoted, " Nothing can restore or 
purify the blood when once corrupted," even if a pardon be 
allowed "after attainder, but the high and transcendent power 
of Parliament." 2 In this province, of course, the General 
Court performed this parliamentary function. 

Nor did attainders operate solely to the injury of the con- 
demned and his kindred ; for as they invariably had relation 
u to the time of the fact committed," they avoided all sub- 
sequent conveyances and incumbrances of real estate by the 
condemned ; and as some of the. diabolical practices alleged in 
the indictments in 1692 dated back many years, the attain- 
ders may have subverted the intervening titles of creditors 
and innocent purchasers. 

That these direful effects were understood and dreaded at 
that time is shown by the horrible nature of Giles Corey's 
punishment, who, to avoid the lasting and ruinous conse- 
quences of attainder, bravely accepted the awful alternative 
of the peine forte et dure. 

If, then, I am right in my opinion that the act in question 

1 " Where one is actually attainted, and his blood corrupted, and dies seized in 
fee, his lands cannot descend, but vest in the king without office found." Dane's 
Abr. ; and see 4 Coke's Hep. [58 a]. 

2 Commentaries, bk. iv. chap. xxxi. § 4. See also ibid., chap. xxvi. p. 387, 
and chap. xxix. p. 376. 


was necessary (and it is not material whether this necessity 
really existed or not, if the legislature believed it did; to secure 
immunity from this terrible ban, the " quietus,'' as Dr. Moore 
calls it, which the last paragraph of the act contains, — the 
protection of the executive officers concerned in the prose- 
cutions of the alleged witches, —is by no means "the most 
important provision of the whole act." Nor is that exemp- 
tion from lawsuits to be condemned as inequitable, if the 
purposes of the act in other respects were fully carried out ; 
since the grant of full compensation to the sufferers would 
unquestionably be good ground for denying them any further 

I dismiss the topic of the declaration in the preamble with 
a brief recapitulation, to show more explicitly the complete 
antagonism between Dr. Moore's views and mine on this head. 
While he detects in this declaration a falsehood and a badge 
of fraud, to me it offers strong internal evidence of genu- 
ineness, because the truth it expresses imparts to the act a 
raison d'etre and the color of necessity. He thinks that the 
" report" was the only legislative proceeding " in favour of" 
the " Estates " of the sufferers, while to me the report and the 
vote accepting it seem intended only to repair damage to the 
person and to chattels, and leave the " Estates " to be restored 
by the operation of a formal act, such as the one before us. 

While in this train of thought, and before proceeding to the 
consideration of details less relevant, I turn to a paragraph of 
Dr. Moore's which I wish could not be construed even into 
the semblance of unkindness. I cannot think my frank and 
genial friend would for a moment intentionally indulge in 
unwarrantably severe reflections upon the character or con- 
duct of the dead, to whom, in the performance of the sacred 
duty of critic or historiographer, he must perforce assign a 
place in his tableaux of the past. I am therefore willing to 
believe that it is my own perversity that detects a shade of 
injustice in his expressed opinion of the main purpose of " the 
wretched remnants" — of the families which were broken and 
scattered by the witch persecutions — in applying to the Gen- 
eral Court. Yet, nevertheless, his words affect me painfully. 
He surely is conscious of the fealty he owes, as a man and a 
scholar, to that imperative law which forbids the ascription 
of unworthy motives without clear and convincing evidence. 


Am I wrong when I believe that the touching words of those 
petitioners were sincere, and that the declaration of the chil- 
dren of Rebecca Nurse, that " the principal thing wherein we 
desire restitution " is " the removing . . . the reproach" which 
the name of their dear mother " and the name of her posterity 
lyes under," only echoed the general sentiment of thj peti- 
tioners ? If I err herein, it is because I do not repudiate the 
charitable rule, and discredit their own professions. But 
where would be my warrant for repudiating that rule ? 

Why must I read between the lines something that shall 
falsify the professions of Francis Faulkner and nineteen others, 
who join in a petition to the General Court " that something 
may be publickly done to take off infanry from the names and 
memory of those who have suffered, . . . that none of their sur- 
viving relations, nor their posterity, may suffer reproach upon 
that account " ? Why should I question the sincerity of the 
declaration of the Corey family that "that which is grieuous to 
us is that we are not only impoverished but also reproached, 
and so may be to all generations, and that wrongfully . . . 
unless something be done for the removal thereof" — or of 
the prayer of Isaac Estey and twenty-one others, that an 
act be passed to " restore the reputations to the posterity of the 
sufferers " ? 

When, in 1710, Estey said " this world can never make me 
any compensation," for the loss of his wife; and the poor man, 
Ephraim Wildes, declared that though his loss was <£20 he 
was willing to take <£14, " considering our names may be 
repaired;" and William Hobbs offered to reduce his claim 
from <£40 to <£10, for a like consideration ; and Mary Brad- 
bury's sons ask that the name of their good mother may be 
inserted in " the bill for taking off the attainder ; " 1 and Charles 
Burroughs, Philip English, John Tarbell, Abraham Foster, 
Elizabeth Johnson, Thomas Carrier, Samuel Ward well, and 

1 As for the compensation, what can be more unselfish than the request of 
the Bradburys to the committee ? — " We doubt not but some others might suffer 
more in their estates ; and it seems very just and reasonable that restitution be, 
in some measure, made as far as the case will bear; and, therefore, we would 
not discourage so just and good a design by any excessive demands, but rather 
comply with anything which your IToners shall think meet to allow," etc. This was the 
general feeling, though there was some contention in the Burroughs family about 
the right of the widow to the lion's share, she having transferred all Burroughs's 
effects to another husband. 


John and Joseph Parker make the same request ; and the 
Rev. Thomas Barnard and eleven other ministers join in pro- 
posing to the General Court to consider whether something 
may not and ought not to be publicly done " to clear the good 
name and reputation " of some of the sufferers, — was money 
all they were after? Was Rebekah Fowle feigning when she 
urged that the business of compensation be quickly disposed 
of, because " every discourse on this melancholy subject doth 
but give a fresh wound to my bleeding heart".? I thank 
God that my respect for human nature, and my regard for 
what I consider the true historical method, alike forbid that 
I should believe it! 

The traditions preserved by the posterity of these good peo- 
ple and by the descendants of their neighbors corroborate 
the testimony of their faded, perhaps tear-stained, petitions 
still in the public files. Even in the pages of contemporary 
history, their pecuniary losses make an inconspicuous figure in 
the list of wrongs. The sums finally awarded to them seem 
miserably small and inadequate ; but there is evidence directly 
tending to show that even this pittance they themselves pro- 
posed, or cheerfully agreed to, as a full reparation of personal 
damages, in consideration of the additional favor of a reversal 
of the attainders. 

It seems to me impossible, after carefully pondering the 
whole story, not to feel that, more than the loss of lands and 
goods, the sufferers and survivors felt the loss of fellowship. 
Neighbors and kindred contemned them. Like the fruit of 
man's first disobedience, the curse laid upon them descended 
to their innocent posterity; and in some instances the sen- 
tence of ecclesiastical excommunication had filled their cup of 
woe by formally consigning the revered parent or the tenderly 
loved child, husband, or wife to sure and eternal damnation. 
These circumstances were likely to impress the survivors with 
a sense of infamy and utter desolation, to which any material 
loss were but as the stolen purse to Othello. 

It is pleasant to know how fully the prayers of these petition- 
ers for a restoration of their good name have been answered. 
Their descendants to-day, filling their full share of places of 
honor and trust, 

" Hear no reproachful whispers on the wind/' 


from the graves of their ancestors. The instigators of, and 
principal actors in, their persecution have sunk into compara- 
tive oblivion, or are remembered with aversion and contempt. 
On the other hand, almost the only sweet episodes in our mem- 
ory of men and manners at that early day are to be found in 
the accounts which have been transmitted to us of the for- 
titude and composure with which those victims of irresponsible 
power endured the insane atrocities inflicted upon them, and 
the glimpses we there obtain of the mutual affection between 
the sufferers and those near and dear to them. The tender 
offices which their friends and kindred performed for them 
while living, and the efforts to remove the stigma of condem- 
nation after they were dead, are as noble and disinterested 
deeds as have ever been commemorated in history or in song. 
Nothing else has withstood the ravages of time that better 
serves to show the susceptibility of the human heart to ten- 
derest emotions, even amidst prevailing malevolence and su- 
perstition ; and nowhere else can we perceive a ray of solace 
or of beauty in the painful details of that picture of early 
provincial life. 

Dr. Moore finds support for his theory of the spuriousness 
of this copy in its " long concealment," which is strengthened 
by the fact that it has no known duplicate, — " one solitary 
printed copy." I confess I fail to see in these circumstances, 
taken separately or together, a foundation for a reasonable 
doubt ; nor do I believe that he will insist that there is any 
recognized rule that requires the determination of the authen- 
ticity of prints supposed to be " unique," to be postponed until 
all doubt is removed by the discovery of other copies, or until 
the individual history of each shall have been traced, step by 
step, to the first possessor. 

I venture to say that in his unrivalled collection of the Laws, 
and the Journals of the House of Representatives, of Massachu- 
setts, our friend here must have pages — yes, and volumes even 
— that cannot be duplicated, which I am sure are, in his esti- 
mation, not less valuable on that account, either to the bibli- 
ophilist, the lawyer, or the historian. Whether other copies of 
this impression may hereafter appear, or not, is of no conse- 
quence when we consider that the printers might, with little 
extra labor, have pulled a score or a hundred sheets while the 
form was in the press. And who shall say that they did not ? 


Neither, since the antiquity of the paper is conceded, and 
it clearly appears to be of the typography of Bartholomew 
Green, do I think it material to trace its history in all the 
obscure past. It may be of interest, however, to know that 
this particular copy was purchased at the sale of the collection 
of the late J. K. Wiggin, and that it bears the autograph sig- 
nature of Nathaniel Lambert, who in 1805 — when he appears 
to have signed it — was the ward, as well as the office-assist- 
ant of Ichabod Tucker, Clerk of the Courts and a successor 
of Stephen Sewall. This takes the paper back nearly half the 
period of its existence, through channels that apparently lead 
to no suspicious source. We may well question if it is possible 
to give as satisfactory an account of any of the numerous 
genuine early prints which every now and then are emerging 
from obscurity into the glare of great libraries or the more 
subdued light of collectors' cabinets. 

The argument founded on the absence of the bill and en- 
grossment from the rolls or archives becomes of still inferior 
force when we consider the numerous casualties, by fire and 
revolution, which all the papers, of equal age, now remaining 
in the Secretary's office, have escaped. The engrossments of 
three hundred and sixty-seven public acts and of seven private 
acts have disappeared from that office by some means or other, 
together with probably a still larger number of original bills. 
Now, if we are to understand Dr. Moore's quotation of a para- 
graph from a message of the House of Representatives to 
Governor Hutchinson in 1770 as offered in support of the 
proposition that the existence of every act is to be finally tested 
by comparison with the engrossment, I think I shall find no 
difficulty in getting his proposition excluded, on the ground 
that practically it is untenable. And if the quotation is not 
made for this purpose, I cannot see the relevancy or the force 
of the argument he would base upon it. It is true that all 
acts of the General Court were required by the charter to be 
under the Province seal ; and that they were engrossed on 
parchment, and signed by the executive, is an undeniable fact ; 
but to conclude, hence, that, if the parchment is lost or de- 
stroyed, the act is a nullity, would be assenting a novel doctrine 
and indicating a new method of repeal, the legality of which 
our friend should not allow to rest unsupported by unequivocal 
and overwhelming authority. Such a proposition, if established, 



would overturn the entire system of the common law, which 
is based upon lost statutes whose purport has been handed 
down, by tradition, in the courts. 

Now, coming to the record evidence, I begin with the re- 
mark that it is fortunate that the necessities of the case do not 
require me to explain all the obscurities of the proceedings of 
the General Court relating to the passage of this act. There 
being no Journal of the House of Representatives in existence 
for that, period, and the riles being imperfect, we are obliged to 
rely mainly upon the journals of the Governor and Council, 
commonly known as the General Court Records, for our knowl- 
edge of the doings of either branch. The originals of these 
journals were consumed, with the Court House, in 1747 ; and 
the duplicate copies, subsequently made, do not exactly agree 
with each other in all respects, and may fail to contain some 
important passages originally entered. I give this as a pos- 
sible explanation of the absence of any express mention of 
the Governor's approval of certain acts in 1711, though, as to 
the act we are considering, I still adhere to the conjecture I 
have already expressed. The anachronism which Dr. Moore 
notices in my statement that the act "had passed the several 
stages of legislation," will disappear if the time referred to by 
me is understood to be the time of the Secretary's "making up 
his records." I admit that my statement is obscure, and that 
my friend might very naturally have supposed that I was under 
the false impression that the passage to enactment preceded 
the adoption of the report. Such, however, is not the case ; 
and I fully concur in his criticism concerning the unsatisfac- 
toriness of the record. 

My statement was a deduction from my previous showing 
from the records, which I believe was full and accurate ; so 
there was, and is, no danger of being misled by it one way or 
the other ; nor, since Dr. Moore has so fully supplemented my 
work by his critical examination of the record entries, in his 
rejoinder, need we again go over the ground. 

One suggestion here, however, will perhaps help to reconcile 
any apparent discrepancy between the report and the act, and 
account for the twofold proceedings. 1 The act began in the 

1 It may at the same time furnish a satisfactory answer to Dr. Moore's ques- 
tion, " Why was it that an act was not drawn embracing all the recommendations 
of the committee ? " etc. Ante, p. 87. 


Council, where the tradition concerning the exclusive right of 
the Representatives to originate money-bills may have oper- 
ated to the rejection of any clause requiring an appropriation. 
When the bill was returned from the House, it was not 
amended, or replaced by a new draught, but it was accom- 
panied by an order, proposed in the House, providing for the 
compensation asked for, as well as for the appointment of a 
joint committee to ascertain the names of the persons who 
were to receive it. If, as is probable, the Representatives felt 
this to be the best course to pursue under the circumstances, 
the Council certainly could not object to it, since it left their 
bill intact, except in regard to one feature in which the co- 
operation of the House was expected as being necessary to 
perfect the bill. 

The declaration of the committee that the claims of the 
petitioners were "moderated," or abated, cannot be refuted 
by comparing the report with the claims on file, until we have 
ascertained that the latter were the first and only demands 
presented ; which the very declaration renders doubtful, to say 
the least. 

Again, the mystery of the omission from the act, of the 
names of seven of the persons condemned is not cleared up — 
at least so as to throw the responsibility upon the legislature 
— by the letter of Nehemiah Jewett to Major Sewall, which 
Dr. Moore has given us in full ; because that letter bears the 
following indorsement, in Sewall's handwriting, " Mr Jewets 
note ab° y e psons condemned and not returned to ye Gener 11 
Court." This important memorandum, which is not printed 
by Woodward, leaves the question still open as to whether or 
not Jewett had any good reason for his supposition. Seeing 
that it was thus indecisive, I did not deem it worth while to 
comment upon it in my reply to Dr. Moore's Notes. 

On one point, however, Dr. Moore has clearly convicted me 
of the very fault that I had animadverted upon in the conduct 
of the committee. I charged them with carelessness in not 
reporting the Christian name of Goodwife Corey. This is 
inexcusable, and I thank m}^ friend for the correction. But 
though the illustration fails in this instance, the charge is 
equally well sustained by their omission to report the name of 
Thomas Rich, — Goodwife Corey's son by a former marriage. 
On referring to my notes, I find that this was the only omission 


I had intended to point out; but in the hurry of composition 
I was in this particular led into a misinterpretation of my 
brief minutes, probably by noticing that the Christian name 
of the mother did not appear either in the act or in the com- 
mittee's list sent by Jewett to Sewall. 1 This mistake would 
not have occurred if I had made the slightest comparison of 
my notes with the report accepted by the legislature. 

Having thus pondered the evidence which the act itself 
affords, and examined into the precedent and contemporaneous 
circumstances which the records disclose, let us resume the 
consideration of the extraneous evidence which Dr. Moore 
adduces to confirm his assertion that no such act was passed. 
We are pointed to the fact, as significant, that the Rev. Israel 
Loring, in 1737, and Governor Belcher, in 1740, appear to 
have had no knowledge of any such act. But this, if it proves 
anything, proves too much. It shows that these worthies 
were as ignorant that the sufferers had received compensation 

— which nobody disputes — as that the attainders had been 
reversed. If the force of the blow demolishes the one, it 
recoils with equal force upon the other ; and either both the 
act and report are not affected by it, or they fall together. 

It is indeed unaccountable that legislative proceedings of 
such importance should so soon pass out of memory ; but the 
fact is, nevertheless, undeniable. And an instance even more 
striking than this is the utter failure of everybody concerned, 

— the committee, the several assemblies, and the petitioners 
themselves, — from 1708 to 1711, to take any notice of the act 
to reverse attainders, passed in 1703, which was only about 
five years before the proceedings were instituted that resulted 
in the passage of the present act. 2 Can our ingenious friend 
devise an explanation of this remarkable oversight that will 
not apply with equal or increased force to the forgetfulness 
manifested a generation later ? This is one of the m} T steries 
that I confess myself incompetent to solve. I feel reasonably 
sure, however, that the committee of 1750 did discover the 
facts relative to the compensation, and the reversal of the 
attainder. Hence it was — and not to justify a report that was 
never made, as my friend rashly concludes — that I expressed 

1 Jewett, who acted as chairman of the committee, was probably responsible 
for the omission in the act, as it is very likely that he drew the bill. 

2 See Dr. Moore's comment on this, in his first note on p. 88, ante. 


the opinion that it was their duty to report against reconsid- 
ering the claim, — a duty from which they ought not to have 
been deterred by any considerations of pity for the "mean, low, 
and abject circumstances " to which the unfortunate descend- 
ants of the condemned had been reduced, and which — to his 
credit, be it said — moved good Parson Loring to sympathy 
and to efforts in their behalf. 

If, after our friend shall have reviewed the subject in the 
aspect in which I now leave it, he shall not agree with me that 
the presumption that the act was regularly passed prevails 
over all the doubts and difficulties which, except for his 
shrewd insight and large knowledge, would perhaps never 
have obscured its title to recognition, T shall be disappointed; 
but in such case there is no one, I am sure, more likely than 
he to discover some further evidence so decisive that this 
shall no longer remain an exception to our uniform agreement 
on historical questions. 

Meanwhile the inscription which my scholarly friend has 
suggested as proper to be placed on the cabinet wherein the 
" remains " of the act are deposited, must be for the present 
declined. As custodian of the relic, I feel that I ought to be 
better assured that it never had vitality before I entomb it 
under an epitaph. 

If any inscription were necessary, I think the following 
would be more appropriate : Stat mole sua ; nullus esse potest 
ambigendi locus. 

This fragile leaf has survived five generations of men, to 
attest to the candid descendants of honorable ancestors, many 
of whose good deeds the world has forgotten — while the 
errors which they shared with their contemporaries have been 
loudly proclaimed — a singular instance of their justice and 
generosity, in that, while they were the first of all people to 
escape the thraldom of a superstition to which in Christian 
Europe alone it is estimated that more than nine millions of 
innocent human beings have been sacrificed, they were also 
the first to make pecuniary reparation to the descendants of 
those who had been ignorantly condemned for witchcraft ; 
and then by this instrument they not only restored the 
forfeited estates of the victims, but rescued their names and 
the names of their posterity from perpetual infamy : AN ACT 
of legislation, without precedent or parallel, and 



which, though hitherto scarcely noticed, will grow more 
lustrous with the lapse of time. 

" So shines a good deed in a naughty world.'''' 

Mr. R. C. Winthrop, Jr., then spoke as follows: — 

Only those members of the Society who have taken an ac- 
tive part in editing manuscripts of the early colonial period can 
appreciate the amount of labor involved in it, owing to the 
difficulty of deciphering handwriting, identifying names, and 
supplying missing dates. Within the last twenty-one years the 
Society has printed five volumes of selections from what are 
known as the Winthrop Papers, in addition to those separately 
published by the President of the Society, and some which 
may be found scattered through our volumes of Proceedings. 
There remains, however, in this collection a mass of unpub- 
lished correspondence, only partially examined, and which, 
together with a good deal of rubbish, contains many items of 
interest to students of early New England history. It rarely 
happens that competent persons have both the leisure and the 
inclination to study these papers, and a very long period is 
likely to elapse before the material is exhausted. It seems to 
me, therefore, desirable to call attention to any little discoveries 
which may be made from time to time, without waiting for a 
whole volume of selections to be got ready for the printer. 
Not long ago I came across, quite by accident, a series of let- 
ters written by John Haynes the younger to Fitz-John Win- 
throp, between the years 1655 and 1663, when they were both 
very young men. John Haynes the elder, as we all know, 
was one of the leading Puritans who came to this country; 
he was Governor of Massachusetts in 1635, and Governor of 
Connecticut in 1639 and for a number of years subsequently. 
He left behind him in England an estate in the county of 
Essex, and two sons by his first marriage, both of whom, it 
is said, drew their swords in the great Civil War, — the elder 
for the King, the younger for the Parliament. His second wife, 
whom he married in New England, was Mabel Harlakenden, 
of a well-knowm Essex family ; and his eldest son by her, 
John Haynes the younger, took his bachelor's degree at Har- 
vard in 1656, and his master's degree at Cambridge, in Eng- 
land, in 1660. He and Fitz-John Winthrop called themselves 


cousins, but their relationship would appear to have been rather 
one of propinquity than of blood, resulting from a number of 
connections they possessed in common through the families of 
Symonds and Mildmay. They became close friends in boy- 
hood, and the letters now in existence are evidently but the 
fragments of a voluminous correspondence. I have not the 
slightest intention of inflicting them all upon the Society ; but 
I shall read a few extracts here and there, because I think a 
certain interest attaches to the familiar intercourse of two 
young men born and bred in New England, in what I might 
call the intermediate colonial period, that is to sajva period 
long subsequent to the original emigration, and yet long an- 
terior to the time of Se wall's Diary. Assuming the writer to 
have been of the same age as his correspondent, the first of 
these letters was written when he was sixteen, dated Hartford, 
Feb. 6, 1655, and addressed " For his much respected Friend, 
Mr. Fitz-John Winthrop at his Father's house in Pequott." 
He begins : — 

" Deare & Loving Cousin ... I might worthily be branded with 
the black mark of ingratitude should 1 be soe far unmindful 1 of my 
duty as not to return you au answer, but I would intreat your favour 
to accept of my mean lines, shamefully naked, not having one ragg of 
rhetorick to cover them, for the reality of my love needs not to be 
painted with any counterfeit gloss. ... A day or two after we gott 
home from Pequott it snew, which hindered the passing of travellers, 
& this present being the first opportunity, I shall give you a faithfull 
account of my service." 

He then alludes to certain matters he had been requested 
to attend to, and adds : — 

" I do intend in the Spring (if it please God) to goe into the Bay 

to the Colledg & am exceeding glad to hear that there is hopes of 

your company. . . . Pray inform M rs Lake that I spoke with M r 
Ilolyoke about the book & he promised to send it." 

The very next day (Feb. 7, 1655), he writes again, saying 
he had forgotten to ask Fitz-John to borrow of his father for 
him "Sir Kellum Digby's book," which he promises to return 
safely. Sir Kenelm Digby had then published several works, 
and this particular one cannot now be identified. 


On the 1st of October, 1655, he writes : — 

" I am ashamed the world should take notice how often I trouble 
you with my frivolous lines, yet once more I shall make bold to in- 
trench upon your patience, only to vent my joy that there is hope you 
& I may live together this winter. I hear you are to be at New- 
Haven & I think so shall I, because there is a Colledg to be settled 
there, M r Leveredg is chosen President." 

This was undoubtedly the Rev. William Leveridge, who 
had been appointed by the Commissioners of the United 
Colonies to instruct the Cape Cod Indians, but whose election 
to the presidency of a proposed college at New Haven, must 
have been only a rumor. It is known that the settlers of 
New Haven were desirous of a college ; but, in point of fact, 
none existed, there till more than sixty years later, for Yale 
College; though founded in 1700, was not removed to New 
Haven till 1717. It is noticeable that although the writer was 
graduated at Harvard in 1656, yet, as late as October, 1655, he 
was not pursuing his studies there; his curriculum must have 
been a short one, and there are no letters to throw any light 
on it. It is probable the young men were for some months at 
Cambridge together at an earlier period; for Fitz-John Win- 
throp is known to have been a student at Harvard, though he 
did not stay long enough to take a degree. A letter dated 
" Hartford, Sabothda3 r -night," and probably written in the 
early spring of 1657, first exhibits John Haynes a victim to 
the tender passion; and his allusions to the young lady (whose 
name is not mentioned) breathe a commendable spirit of 
disinterested resignation. 

" I sincerely thank you, for the information I desired ; it is my 
earnest desire that all possible felicity may waite upon her & if it 
shall please God to inrich any one with such a Jewell of inestimable 
value, I truly wish that that relation may prove a liveing Springe 
of life-lasting joy & sweet contentment to her. I have a true, hon- 
ourable esteem of her, as her merits do justly challenge, but my own 
small deserts, with a late accidentall providence, convince mee I should 
both wronge her & myself to be any ways an impediment to any. I 
wish her one that may equall her in worth, who I dare say (if any such 
be found) will be ten times better than myself." 

On the 1st of May of the same year, he writes : — 


" Did you know how exceedingly niggardly & penurious time at 
this Instant is, you would thinke there were no need of any other 
Apology for my scrabbling an overhasty letter. The infinite expres- 
sions of my obligations due for your extraordinary love, I am con- 
strained, sorely against my will, to contract into one poore but hearty 
thanke you. ... I am sorry I can not come to N : Haven, being for the 
present detained here by inviolable (not cords) but cables of occasions. 
. . . My brother Joseph went this week with M rs Cotton into the 
Bay. . . . Goodman Mitchell tells me Latimer has gott your sadle 
& that into his griping clutches, refusing to accept of the horse 
without the sadle. My itch is allmost gone out of sight, but whether 
it doth play bo-peep & intend shortly to torment me with an unwel- 
come visit, further experience must determine ; if you be cured, I wish 
you would impart the meanes, it is a most grievous & perplexing evill 
& my anxiety to be rid of it, together with the unpleasant remedies 
that promise a cure, devours the greater part of my comfort. Dres my 
most hearty respects in one of your holy-day complements & most 
humbly present them, attended with innumerable thankes for theyr 
boundles courtesy, to your worthily respected Father & Mother. We 
should all with hearty acclamations welcome them, would they vouch- 
safe their willingnes to afford us a visit." 

Before the end of this year, 1657, both these young men 
sailed for England, — John Haynes to pursue his studies at the 
University of Cambridge, and Fitz-John Winthrop to accept 
the offer of a commission which had been made him by two 
of his uncles, who were colonels in the Parliamentary army. 
He became a lieutenant in Reade's regiment of foot, then 
stationed in Scotland, under General Monk, and a considerable 
period evidently elapsed before he was able to communicate 
with his friend. On the 17th of January, 1659, John Haynes 
writes from "Pembroke Hall, Cambridge," alluding to their 
having been both so long abroad without meeting or hearing 
from each other, and saying he sends these lines at hazard, 
doubtless by private hand. 

Meantime Oliver Cromwell had died, his son Richard was 
soon to resign his short-lived Protectorate, and at the close of 
this year, 1659, General Monk, in secret understanding with 
the exiled king, began his march from Scotland to London. 
Reade's regiment, in which Fitz-John Winthrop was now a 
captain, was one of those which accompanied Monk, and this 
long-interrupted correspondence was resumed in the spring of 
1660. On the 5th of June John Haynes, writing from Pem- 



broke Hall, addresses his friend " at the Bell-cony Tavern, 
near the new Exchange, in the Strand : " — 

" Your's of May 31. I gladly received & immediately returned an 
answer, but not being certaine of the delivery of it, I am bold to second 
it with these scrawles, being farr more willing to incurr the censure of 
being importune & troublesome by my frequent writeing, than by my 
silence to create the least suspition that I can be forge tfull of soe good 
& deserveing a friend. Sir, I bewaile my unhappines that soe many 
sweet lines of your's were kept (by what miscarrying chance I know 
not) from him that would have exceedingly delighted himself in the 
perusall of them, for not a tittle of the foure letters you mentioned 
in your last ever came to my sight. I fear you sent by the post 
whereas the safer conveyance is by carriers, who come from the Bull 
in Bishopgate-street on mundays, weddensdays, thirsdays & fridays. 
... I beseech you, Sir, revive your languishing purpose of affording 
me a happy sight of you & take the trouble to visitt Cambridge. I 
would not long content myself in not waiteing on you in London, but 
that an indispensable hinderance forbids, which I presume I shall satisfy 
you with, when we come mutually to impart our various adventures 
since our parting. I have been watching in the camp of a beggerly 
Minerva, whilst you have followed the Trumpett of a glorious & gal- 
lant Mars." 

He then reiterates his eagerness to see him, adding : — 

"You may ride through to Cambridge very well in a day, if you be 
but early in your setting out, & if you send to the Bull I presume you 
may heare of company allmost every day ; if not, your road is very easy 
to be found: from London to Hodgsdon, from Hodgsdon to Ware, from 
Ware to Pucceridge, from Pucceridge to Bark way, from Barkway to 
Barly, from Barly to Fullmire, from Fullmire to Hasson-mills, from 
Hasson-mills to Trumpington, thence to Cambridge. If you come, 
pleas to sett up your horse either at the white Lion or the black Bull, 
which are both good Innes & neer our Colledg. ... If you can come 
no further than Ware, I will (whatever come off) meet you there when 
you shall appoint. Postscript [in very large letters], the sooner the 

On the 24th of July he writes : — 

" Truly among all my New Ingland friends I finde none dyed soe 
in graine as yourself, but their colours if they doe not change yet they 
fade, but you that were very civill there now exceed very civility 
here. My resentment of your favours is so deep I can not pump 


it into expressions. Sir, I most heartily thank you for your con- 
descending troublesome (as to yourself) visitt at Cambridge & for 
that series of civility till I were soe unhappy to part with you. Pleas 
to iuforme mee of your progress with your Lady, present my humble 
service (though unknowne) to her, & tell her you have a servant pickled 
up for her that with great faithfullnes & alacrity will approve him- 
self ambitious to observe both your commandes. I do not say I am 
fond of the happy nes to kiss her hands, but her feet, having interest 
in her legs till my Garters be payd, which I adjure you to be carefull 
of as you would be glad to have a Lady leggs & all. [This implies 
that the writer had been commissioned to procure a pair of garters as 
a present to a young lady, — an attention which, in our day, might seem 
equivocal ; but our forefathers were not burdened with false modesty, 
and preferred useful to ornamental gifts.] I will not tell you the story 
of the sweet parcell of Ladys I saw contending as I came downe & all 
because Lilly told them she should be infinitely happy that could but 
obtaine that patterne of perfection Captain Winthrop." 

There are no more letters till the following year, 1661, when 
the position of both young men underwent a change. The 
Restoration of Charles II. resulted in the gradual disbanding 
of the greater portion of Monk's forces; and Fitz- John's regi- 
ment was mustered out, to his great disappointment. One 
of his uncles was dead, and the other too much identified 
with the Commonwealth to be able any longer to further his 
nephew's military advancement. Uncertain whether to return 
to New England or to await some opening in the mother coun- 
try, Fitz-John made frequent visits to his relations in Essex, 
where he often met John Hay nes, who, having taken his mas- 
ter's degree, had ceased to reside at Cambridge and made his 
home chiefly at Hadham in that county. On the 26th of 
February, 1661, the latter, who had apparently just learned 
that his friend was soon to lose his commission and likely to 
return to Connecticut, writes : — 

"Your lines wrought such an effect upon mee that I first concluded 
it a death to think of parting with soe much goodnes, & theu, not- 
withstanding the importunity of a loving kinsman & the plea of a 
faire opportunity for stay, I waded through all objections to a resolve 
of hazarding any difficulties for the injoyment of my best Achates. If 
you think fitt not to part with mee, I can not desert you. And though 
I have twice undone myselfe by my desire to gratify friends, yet I per- 
suade myselfe I see something soe unusuall & genuine in your friend- 


ship, that I dare not dream of a repentance for following through the 
World soe noble & generous a soule. Ship yourselfe when you pleas, 
I am ready to attend you." 

Learning that no immediate departure was in contempla- 
tion, he writes, a fortnight later (March 11), about a very 
different matter : — 

" Deare Cousin, if it be possible, finde out your honoured Cousin 
and oblige her to accept of him that will rejoyce to be wholly at her 

Whichever of Fitz- John's cousins this young lady may 
have been, it is clear she did not smile upon this suit ; and in 
the course of the summer John Haynes consoled himself with 
an attachment he soon repented. On the 18th of November, 
1661, he writes : — 

" You are pleased to charge mee with a scandalous breach of friend- 
ship. I can not but bewaile my very hard fate that one I soe intirely 
respect & love should harbour soe harsh an opinion of mee as to 
thinke I am afraid to intrust my little concernes to soe faithfull a breast 
as your's. When I told you I was come up to disintangle myselfe from 
that ingagement to a Gentlewoman, wherein I had insnared myselfe, I 
declared all I then knew ; neither could I impart more concerning it 
till the last night I was with you, for it was but that afternoon I 
brought it to a conclusion by the mediation of some friends. She 
fully resigned all right she had in mee & I what I had in her, before 
witnes, soe that I am completely disingaged, though it hath cost mee 
some mony to gett off cleare. I am very glad, howsoever, that I am 
fully at liberty, because my friends were all averse to it because she 
wanted mony, though she was a very pretty, good-conditioned, well- 
bred gentlewoeman. I should not have been shy of telling this, had 
you made the least inquiry, but bluntly to fall of telling it I thought 
would have argued mee a little too selfe-conceited. Your estrangedness 
in your lines cutt mee to the heart. Your former letters vouchsafed mee 
the familiar compellation of Cousin ; in this, you were pleased to cutt 
me short of that favour, as unworthy the owneing. ... I am come to 
Towne on purpose to see you & will waite on you to-morrow at nine 
of the clock." 

However sordid may have been the motives of this well- 
bred gentlewoman, there is room for suspicion that the writer's 
desire to be free from her was prompted by the kindling 
of another flame. He had hardly penned the foregoing letter 


when he fell grievously ill of the small-pox, and having been 
nursed through this malady b}^ Fitz-John, almost the first act 
of his convalescence was to address a letter to the hitter's 
father, Governor Winthrop, of Connecticut, who had just ar- 
rived in London on business of the colony. Either for pur- 
poses of secrecy, or to display his scholarship, he wrote in 
Latin, recalling the friendship between his deceased father 
and the Governor, and begging a great favor. " There is," 
he says, " a lady by the name of Parnell (qucedam est domina 
Parnill), whose good opinion concerns me not a little (jquam 
bene de me sentire non parum meet refert~)." He entreats the 
Governor to write a letter for him to show her, speaking of 
him in as complimentary language as he conscientiously can ; 
and he suggests that allusions be made to the capacity he 
early exhibited in New England, to his morals, and to his 
talent. " Nemini mortalitcm hoc precor palam facias, Cras 
vel etiam die Saturni currus revertetur. Hoc si cito bis feceris. 
(I beg you not to let a human being know of this. The coach 
returns to-morrow or Saturday, and jo\\ will have done it twice 
if you do it immediately.) Think well of this letter written 
with a trembling hand (importuna corporis febri). I hardly 
dare pray you to excuse my confidence, or rather my impu- 
dence, in dealing so familiarly with one so exalted, — ascribe 
my audacity to the occasion, not to my nature." And he 
concludes : " Suavissime vivas, vir honoratissime, nee preces tuce 
desint sui observantissimo Johanni Haynes.''' 1 

However kindly disposed may have been the Governor of 
Connecticut towards the friend of his son, and the son of his 
friend, he is not likely to have consented to become a go- 
between in this delicate transaction ; and the " lady by the 
name of Parnell," not improbably a collateral ancestress of a 
notorious personage of our own time, disappears from these 
pages. A few weeks later, however, John Haynes writes a 
second letter to the Governor, this time in English, thanking 
him for his inquiries about his health, mentioning that his 
fever has left him with sore eyes, and desiring his prayers 
that "this great deliverance may prove a sanctifyed mercy." 
He adds that if he does not succeed in procuring settled oc- 
cupation in England, " where my heart is much," he purposes 
for New-England, there "to spend my time, if you will ac- 
cept mee for a border, in the pleasant study of physick, sub 



tuis auspiciis. I hope you have that respect for mankind as 
not to suffer such a treasure of knowledge to dye with your- 
selfe." This is an allusion to the well-known taste of the Gov- 
ernor of Connecticut for medical studies. In the absence of 
regular physicians in the colony, he often practised gratuitously 
among his friends and neighbors. 

On the 20th of February, 1662, John Haynes writes a glow- 
ing letter of thanks for his friend's devotion during his illness ; 
but it is evident that his love affairs were again on an unsat- 
isfactory footing. 

"You will excuse mee from the torment of distending my innocent 
braines upon the rack to make them confes in a complement how much 
I owe you. Let it suffice that I am sensible it is more than my poore 
short life will be sufficient for the payment of, and truly at my death 
I beleeve my obligations to my best friend will be inscribed in fairer 
characters in my heart than the loss of Calais was in Queen Mary's. 
. . . Perhaps you may think the late violent storme that raged on 
Tuesday parcelld mee out into atomes, but I am still what I was & all 
your's. I request you to deliver the enclosed ; the end of it is only 
to get a letter conveyed to Mistress Mary Potter, the designe of which 
is only a faire receding, though parting will be a very death to mee. 
. . . Pleas to open my little trunck with the enclosed key & send mee 
3 Bands wrapt in a paper, 3 little cuffs, my Boottops & rideing stock- 
ins, — putt theas & my spurrs into my Boots. Desire my Aunt to buy 
mee a dozen & a \ of black wastcoat buttons." 

Three weeks later (March 11, 1662) he writes, not, as 
usual, from Hadham, but from his uncle Roger Harlaken- 
den's, at Earls Colne, in the same county : — 

" If you can obtain tidings of that Gentlewoman's aboad, I will re- 
turn to London by the first convenience, but if nothing can be heard 
of the Lady, I purpose to abide here till the ship be ready to goe." 

None of the answers to these letters are in existence ; but a 
certain sidelight is thrown upon the young men's plans at this 
period in two from Fitz-John to his father, dated 19th and 
23d of December, 1661. The Governor had evidently pointed 
out that his son had spent a good deal of money, and the 
latter replies with dignity: — 

" Sir, I confess the som I have received was great, but noe more than 
what former pressing & unavoydable expenses did require. I alwaies 


kept a just decorum betwene extremes, &, as I did never prodigally 
s t pend, soe I did never basely spaire, which is most hatefull to my nat- 
urall inclination." 

Alluding to the loss of his military pay, he says he has an 
opportunity of bettering himself by an advantageous marriage, 
but that, in his opinion, the remedy would be worse than the 
disease : — 

" I would not as yet accept the proffer of a married life, in which 
there are soe many restless & unavoydable cares & inconveniences. T 
am yet young enough to spend some few years in travell, in which the 
cheife end of my adventure should be the attainement of experience, & 
my owne inclination leads me to that designe, yet what you shall please 
to direct I shall redily comply with. My cousin [evidently John 
Haynes] hath som thought he may goe into France this winter." 

The Governor consented that his son should remain abroad 
another year, and there is reason for supposing him to have 
been on the Continent between March and October, 1662, 
when there is a gap in this correspondence. That he had a 
strong inducement to visit the Low Countries, is manifest from 
a letter written from East Hatley, in Cambridgeshire, in the 
latter part of October, 1661, by Mrs. Emmanuel Downing to. 
her nephew, Governor Winthrop, of Connecticut. In it she 
particularly inquires after his son " Fitts," and adds : — 

<( 1 was troubled he made himself such a stranger to his relations 
in London. My son George had a great desire to have gained him & 
served him, and, though having much business, went twice that I know 
of to his lodgings for that purpose ; indeed, my Lady told me my son 
would have taken him for his companion into Holland & his dyet 
should have cost him nothing." 

Mrs. Downing's son George was the celebrated Sir George 
Downing, who, having been Cromwell's Minister to Holland, 
had so ingratiated himself with Charles II. as to have been 
recently reappointed to that mission. 

Whether John Haynes went also to the Continent is very 
doubtful, as his next letter would indicate that the friends 
had not met for some time. It is dated " Copford, in Essex, 
Oct. 7, 1662," and addressed " For Captain Fitz- John Win- 
throp, at his Lodgings at M r Bloxon's in Winchester-house, 
near M r Hutchinson's glass-house, in South wark, London:" — 


" It was not a more bitter sarcasme to pronounce him to have noe 
nose that was notorious for his prominent beak, than your owneino- of 
obligations to mee is a sad remembrancer of my incapacity to reflect 
your favors. You have heaped soe much kindness upon mee that I 
have never been able in any proportion to acknowledge, much less to 
retaliate it, & though I know you to be noe stranger to that divine 
quality of forgetting your owne benefits to others, yet I can not think 
you soe wholly devested of man soe as the remembrance of those sig- 
nall indearments wherewith your goodnes hath invironed mee should 
never present itself to your thoughts. Sure you must sometimes rec- 
ollect how when you came out of Scotland & were aloft in your im- 
ployment you vouchsafed to descend into that vally where I sneakt 
away my days & to give mee the glory of your imbraces at Cambridg; 
& then leadeing mee to London permitted a shade by your side & a 
dark spot in your orb that did but allay your lustre. But, above all, 
the stupendous affection that you gave mee half a life by keeping mee 
company in my dismall calamity the small pox, when you chose rather 
to hugg a nasty disease in your bosome than to abandon mee to that 
melancholy solitarynes which would probably have proved fatall. . . . 
Sir, your power over mee is absolute, — you may summon mee upon 
what stage you pleas & should you assigne mee to act a Jack Pudding's 
part, I would run readily through it without the least repineing. I 
examine not what is injoyned but who injoynes it ; but pardon mee, 
sweet Cousin, if I think that while you conceive you have cutt out 
some honour for mee, you are noe less mistaken than those that 
through a magnifying glass take a louse for a hogg. . . . The coloured 
glass of your affection puts a tincture upon my worthless scrawles that 
noe unbiassed judgment can ever discerne. To the delicate gust of a 
curious Lady their rudenes will but proclaim mee coarse & unpolished 
& you overseen & mistaken in the choice of a friend. But I have 
left the inclosed soe that, after your perusall, you may either deliver it 
to the flames or to the Lady ; if you designe it to that honour, bestow 
a wafer & a superscription on it & let it be accompanyed with the ten- 
der of my humble respects. The Country would not afford mee any 
guilt paper, which inforced mee to the rudeness of addressing in a 
coarse sheet." 

Until I read that sentence, I was not aware that gilt-edged 
note-paper was in common use two and a quarter centuries 
ago ; and as I have handled hundreds of letters of that period 
without noticing any of it, I imagine it may have been con- 
fined to correspondence of a tender or ceremonious nature. 

A fortnight later he writes : — 


" I have heard that Lords sometimes take the acknowledgment of a 
pepper-corne from some that hold of their Mannors ; such a kinde of 
rent you require of mee, viz : two & fifty letters per annum, which 
summe amounts to about the value of a pepper-corne, & the terme of 
my payment bearing date from this opportunity, I must conforme to 
that good old weather-beaten proverb & cutt my coat according to my 
cloath. Since my sluggish invention is miserably scant & narrow, I 
must snip it out into very little slips, or it will never be able to muster 
up the bede-roll of soe many scrolles as you pleas to exact of mee. But 
to give you a taste of what you must expect, take halfe a dozen of these 
shreads which must be digested into soe many letters, viz : Sir, I respect 
you. Sir, you are respected by mee. Sir, you are respected of mee. 
Sir, you are the object of my respects. Sir, my respects are terminated 
upon you as their object. Sir, my respects are fixed soe direct upon you 
that in comparison they look asquint upon all the World besides. Of 
these & such like thrums I must make up all my epistles & when the 
intire catalogue of them is come in & patent together, they may hap to 
compose something that will resemble a tailor's motly-cushion. . . . 
Anatomists tell mee that my heart, though it present to the outward 
view but one lump & mass of flesh, yet that curious nature within 
hath divided it into many neat & distinct rooms ; if it be so, I am sure 
that their cheifest adornment & richest furniture is that in every one 
of them is hung up your picture, drawne to the life in lasting colours 
by the pensill of an affectionate respect, & there is no dust can sully 
that Idea, which will continue fresh to my sight till death draw the 
curtaine before my eyes & put outt the lights. I think, Sir, in your's 
you owned the Lady you commanded mee to write to, to be the only 
Mistress you adored ; pleas to informe mee further concerning it. . . . 
You may doe me a signall favour if you can dexterously by some means 
inform Major Thompson, or Mr. Lee, that I frequent the common- 
prayer & apprehend myself in conscience bound to it, for I am ingaged 
to his Sister, & either they will fly off upon this or comply with my 
minde. Pray be carefull it be not discovered that you doe anything 
out of dtsigne." 

This backsliding on the part of one born and bred amid 
the strictest Puritan surroundings would appear not to have 
availed him, as he writes, a few days later, " If you have not 
yet complyed with the request in my last, pleas to forbear 
till I confer with you." He again apologizes for having noth- 
ing to write about, and says : — 

" The petite stock of my scanty invention I am obliged to manage to 
the most thrifty advantage ; a little gold may be driven to a great ex- 



tent, but lead is Dot capable of being any way proportionably dilated 
to that fine & subtile minerall; being conscious, therefore, that my 
leaden fancy will not admitt of any spacious inlargement without fre- 
quent flaws & cracks of non-sense ? I can not affoard more than a scrap 
at a season/' 

Here follows a gap of five months ; and his next letter, dated 
" Hadham, April 6, 1663," contains some uncomplimentary ex- 
pressions about one Captain Scott, whom he accuses of trying 
to sow dissension between them, and concludes with an earnest 
entreaty for his friend's " picture." The request is somewhat 
puzzling, as this was two hundred years before photography, 
and it would seem improbable that a young officer, with noth- 
ing but his pay and a modest allowance from his father, should 
have had himself painted on canvas or in miniature. The only 
existing likeness of him represents a man in middle life, and I 
incline to think the one here referred to must have been a tri- 
fling sketch by some amateur. Be this as it may, a few weeks 
later he and his father embarked for New England; and it may 
seem surprising that, after all his protestations, John Haynes 
did not accompany them ; but their departure, repeatedly 
postponed, was somewhat sudden at the last, and that a strong 
pressure was put on him to stay behind is evident from the 
fragment of a letter from Charles Haynes, of Copford Hall, 
who says, " I hope I have persuaded Cousin John not to go 
back." There are but two more letters of his, both written 
to New England. In the first of these, from London, June 
19, 1663, he expresses a fear lest his parting letter should have 
miscarried, as it probably did ; and in the second, also from 
London, August 26, of the same year, he rejoices at the news 
of his friend's safe arrival home, reproaches him with not 
having yet written, and consults him about his estate in Con- 
necticut. In a postscript he adds, " Doctor Cunstable is 
goeing to pott, being in present danger of matrimony." 

His younger brother, Joseph, also a graduate of Harvard, 
though not of English Cambridge, became a well-known 
Connecticut minister, some of whose letters are in this col- 
lection, but they contain no reference to his brother John. 
The latter's subsequent history is almost a blank. Mr. Sav- 
age speaks of him as having married and as having enjoyed 
a living of the Church of England in Suffolk or Essex; while 
the more recent researches of Mr. Sibley establish that he 


was first curate of Hemmington, in Suffolk, and afterwards 
rector of Swansey, near Copford, in Essex. According to 
Mr. Savage, he died " before 1698;" according to Mr. Sibley, 
"prior to April 25, 1671." If this latter date be correct, he 
could not have lived more than three and thirty years ; in any 
case, he must have been dead in 1693, when Fitz-John, then 
agent of the Connecticut colony, returned to England a grave, 
elderly man, whose letters make no allusion to the crony of 
his salad days. The family name of his wife I have not been 
able to ascertain, but I find among these papers a single letter 
from her, dated "London, Oct. 27, 1698," addressed to Fitz- 
John Winthrop, then Governor of Connecticut, and signed 
" Anne Haynes." It relates to some landed property of her 
deceased husband, and her handwriting is unusually elegant 
for that period. Its general character would indicate a woman 
of decision, one who would have known how to monopolize, 
and, if necessary, to discipline, the exuberant and somewhat 
indiscriminate emotions which were so apt to agitate the 
affectionate but too susceptible heart of the Rev. John 

Mr. Sl after presented from Mr. Z. E. Cary, of East 
Brookfield, a volume of " Cary Memorials ;" and from Mr. 
Henry Edwards, of Boston, a heliotype copy of the proclama- 
tion of Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, which was issued in 
Paris, and thrown from the windows of the Palais Royal on 
July 29, 1830. 

Mr. Appleton communicated a Memoir, which he had been 
appointed to prepare, of the late Mr. H. G. Somerby. 






We may, I think, justly consider Horatio Gates Somerby 
to have been the originator of systematic research, by which 
to connect families of New England with their ancestors in 
Great Britain. As such, the Massachusetts Historical Society 
elected him a Corresponding Member in 1859, after his death 
accepted the charge of his manuscripts as worthy of safe keep- 
ing and study, and undertook to print a memoir of his life. 
His collections naturally contain all that he could learn of his 
own paternal ancestry, and the results may be briefly stated 
here. Anthony Somerby, first of the name in New England, 
a man of education and a graduate of Clare Hall, Cambridge, 
put on record that he was " the son of Richard Somerby, the 
son of Henry Somerby of Little Bytham, in Lincolnshire, in 
the Realm of England." His descendant Horatio, after years 
of study and the collection of much matter relating to the 
name, never was able to carry farther back his line of ancestry 
with positive proof. 

Anthony Somerby settled at Newbury, Massachusetts, and 
from him the subject of this memoir was of the sixth generation 
in descent. He was son of Thomas and Sarah (Dole) Som- 
erby, and born at Newburyport Dec. 24, 1805 ; his baptismal 
name being of course a souvenir of the Revolution. He was 
educated at the schools of his native town, which he left at 
about the age of sixteen. His early tastes were decidedly 
artistic, and he studied and practised painting for some years 
at Boston and Troy, New York, making the former city his 
home about 1832. He established himself here as a fancy 
painter and japanner, appearing as such in the " Boston Direc- 
tory," 1834-40. He seems then to have passed a few years 
elsewhere, but is found again here 1844-46. 


In this last year, 1846, he first visited England, sailing from 
New York in the "Mediator," in June. His first interest and 
object was of course to visit Little Bytham, the home of his 
ancestors, and the village of Somerby in the same county, 
Lincoln, whence the name is derived. Of this visit he has 
left a careful record in a little volume, with many sketches of 
both places. I shall quote a few of his words, as they express 
the feelings of such Americans as are fortunately able to stand 
in the churches where their ancestors worshipped, to look on 
the hills and trees they saw, and to walk in the fields and 
lanes where they played and strolled. 

He drove from Stamford by way of Holywell Hall, and 
"the spire of a church appeared in a valley. I at first thought 
that the church stood alone, but directly the whole village 
burst upon my sight, and a more picturesque scene it is diffi- 
cult to conceive of. Verily my ancestor had a little paradise 
to dwell in." He immediately went to the church, and "never 
did I see before such a gem of antiquity, so full of Gothic orna- 
ments and so beautifully executed. . . . The interior is one of 
the most curious antiquated places I ever saw. I could not 
help feeling that now I stood in the very church where my 
ancestor worshipped more than two hundred years ago." He 
encountered the usual feeling of astonishment when he an- 
nounced himself as an American. Even the rector " asked if 
my father or mother were not English, and when I told him 
that I was the first of the family who had ever left America 
for more than two hundred years, he looked at me with more 
wonder than ever." It may be mentioned here that Mr. 
Somerby at a later date was certainly in every way a most 
English-seeming American, partly doubtless in consequence of 
his long residence in England, but partly, I feel sure, by the 
work of nature. 

His first stay in England was short, but probably decided 
his future life, more of which was passed in that country than 
in America. He often crossed the ocean, and left a record of 
most of his voyages. He made London his home, and genea- 
logical researches his occupation, finding therein his pleasure 
and his support. He made extensive collections concerning 
the Somerby family, and more than once began the prepara- 
tion of a genealogy, but on such an elaborate plan that little 
was ever accomplished; his model was the unfortunate His- 


tory of the Rev. Thomas Prince. He was employed by many 
persons in America to gather all possible facts relating to their 
English origin; and many families are indebted to him for 
their knowledge of their proved or probable connection across 
the ocean, while for others he greatly added to such facts as 
were known before. 

In Bond's i( Genealogies of Watertown " many pages con- 
tain the result of his searches, while the separate genealogies 
of the families of Blake, Bright, Chase, Cotton, Lawrence, 
Peck, Wolcott, and others owe to his labors much of the mat- 
ter relating to the English ancestry of the founder in this 
country. He also communicated to the " New England His- 
torical and Genealogical Register" many lists of Passengers to 
Virginia, and a very valuable list of passengers to New Eng- 
land from Weymouth, 1635, printed in vol. xxv. In these 
studies his artistic tastes and education helped him much, as 
he was able to illustrate the manuscripts sent to his employers 
with beautifully drawn coats-of-arms, and with sketches of 
churches, old. houses, etc. The volumes and papers now be- 
longing to this Society contain a vast amount of genealogical 
material, which he unfortunately had never found time to 
arrange carefully, and much of which is only the original pen- 
cil record. His finished drawing of the church of Bicester, 
in Oxfordshire, whence the Sumners came, was left to this 
Society by General William H. Sumner. 

The latter years of Mr. Somerby's life found him a new 
interest and occupation, to which he warmly devoted himself 
and in which he gained high credit. He had long been inti- 
mate with Mr. George Peabody, the London banker; the 
acquaintance, I suppose, originating in his employment to 
trace the Peabody genealogy. Naturally, therefore, when the 
trustees of Mr. Peabody's donation for the benefit of the poor 
of London found it necessary to employ a permanent secretary, 
who might relieve them of much responsibility and undertake 
the active management of affairs, they turned to Mr. Somerby. 
He accepted the position, and all the reports of the trustees 
issued during Mr. Somerby's life appear with his name at- 
tached. Much was left to him, and to him was due much of 
the success which from the first attended the working of the 
great beneficiary fund. 

I have said before that Mr. Somerby was a most English- 


seeming American. If I may trust my present recollection of 
boyhood, it was a surprise to me to learn that he was not an 
Englishman. He certainly had to an unusual degree the ap- 
pearance, manner, and speech of one, while preserving at heart 
all the feelings and sympathies of an American. He died in 
London, Nov. 14, 1872 ; his body was brought home, and now 
rests in the ground of Newburyport, his birthplace. 

Mr. Somerby's manuscript volumes contain abstracts of 
many English wills, in which relatives in New England or Vir- 
ginia are mentioned. Some of them have been printed as com- 
ing from him, and some have been also found by other persons 
and printed in their names. To place here a brief statement 
of the remainder seems to be a proper memorial of Mr. Som- 
erby from the Society which has charge of his collections : — 

John Downing, of St. Clements Danes, co. Middlesex, in his will 
written 15 May, 1623, mentioned his daughters Catherine and Abigail, 
" moreover my will and meaning is that if my said daughter Abigale 
shall determine to goe to Virginia, That upon her goinge awaye my 
Executors shall to and for her use (pay) unto the Virginia Company 
the some of six pounds towards her Charges," son John Smith and sev- 
eral grandchildren of that name, son Drake with children, sister Joice 
Wilson, grandchild Abraham Downing, sons Richard and Francis 
Downing. Proved at London, 7 July, 1623. 

John Atkins, of Virginia, in his will written 3 September, 1623, 
desired to be buried at James City, requested Luke Boyse of the neck 
of land to administer upon his estate, mentioned Peter Staferton, 
Christopher Davison, and his brother William Atkins, dwelling near 
the Bear at Basinghall, London.. Proved at London, 2 October, 1 624. 

Matthew Cradock, of London, in his will mentioned his wife Re- 
becca, gave one half of his estate in New England in America to his 
wife, and after her death to his brother Samuel Cradocke, and one half 
to his daughter Damaris, mentioned also his brother's son Samuel, a 
student at Emanuel College, Cambridge, his brother's son Matthew, his 
sister Dorothy Sawyer, and his cousin Hannah Jorden. Proved at 
London, 4 June, 1 641. 

Judith Gould, of Watford, co. Herts, widow, in her will written 
6 May, 1650, mentioned her son Abel, daughter Lydia, daughter Eliz- 
abeth with children, son-in-law George Young, son Nathan in New 
England with children, children of daughter Sarah, son Zacheus dead, 
daughter Mary, " £30 to be sent to New England for my son Nathan 


and my daughter Sarah their own children to be equally divided be- 
twixt them both." Proved at London, 3 September, 1650. 

Samuel Allen, of Norwich, in his will written 16 April, 1651, men- 
tioned the child of his sister Sapp living in New England. Proved at 
London, 4 July, 1651. 

Colonel Edward Hooker, of London, in his will written 8 May, 1650, 
mentioned his late wife Ellen, the parish and church of Chilcomb [per- 
haps his birthplace], his brother Peter with children Ralph, Henry, and 
Sibil, Ann eldest daughter of his late brother Richard, her sister Mary 
'* that is now in New England," his sister Boyse, his sister Eger, his 
cousin Edward Hooker, of Chilcombe, his cousin John, his son Corne- 
lius, and his wife Elizabeth. Proved at London, 16 July, 1651. 

George Fitzpen ah. Phippen, in his will written 20 July, 1650, men- 
tioned Joan Phippen widow, Eleanor Phippen now wife of Francis 
George, his brother-in-law Edward Grosse of Truro, his brother's son 
Roger Phippen, " Item for my brother David in New England I doe 
give and bequeath unto his eldest sonne the lesser Trewoone unto his 
second sonne that Trevossa whereon the said Nicholas Clemowe liveth 
and unto his third sonne the other Trevossa called Petherickes," also 
mentioned daughters of his brother David, his sister Cicely Reignolds, 
his kinsman Thomas Phippen of Clemence, his wife Mary, " Item my 
prayer is that God would provide some able and faithful minister to 
succeed me in Lamoran." Proved at London, 1 March, 1651. 

John Hooker, of Marefield, co. Leicester, in his will written 1 Janu- 
ary, 1654, mentioned his cousin William Jennings, his cousin Samuel 
Hooker student in New England, various other cousins of different 
names, his cousin John Hooker student at Oxford, and his sister Fran- 
ces Tarleton of London. Proved at London, 26 November, 1655. 

Anne Noyes, of Cholderton, co. Wilts, widow, in her will written 
18 March, 1655, mentioned her two sons James and Nicholas Noyes 
now in New England, and their children, son-in-law Thomas Kent, and 
Robert Read of East Cholderton. Proved at London, 21 April, 1658. 

William Pynchon, of Wrasbury, co. Bucks, in his will written 
4 October, 1662, mentioned his daughter Ann, wife of Master Henry 
Smith, and their children Martha, Elizabeth, Mary, Rebecca, and 
Elisha, his deceased daughter Margaret Davis of Boston in New Eng- 
land, and her children Thomas, Benjamin, and William, his son Master 
John Pynchon of Springfield in New England, children of his " son 
Master Elizur Holyoke in New England," Joseph, John, and Mehitable 


Pynchon, and his sister Susan Piatt. Proved at London, 8 Decem- 
ber, 1G62. 

Samuel Crane, of Great Coggeshall, co. Essex, in his will written in 
November, 1G69, mentioned his sister Margaret Rogers now of Ipswich 
in New England, his kinsman William Dyer, his sister Mary wife of 
Henry Whiting of Ipswich, Suffolk, his sister-in-law wife of Daynes, 
the late wife of brother Robert Crane, his sister Elizabeth late wife 
of William Chaplin late of Bury St. Edmunds, deceased, his brother 
William Clopton, his cousin Lawrence Stisted of Ipswich and niece 
Mary his wife, his uncle Edward Sparhawk, with children Samuel and 
Sarah, his kinswoman Bridget wife of William Andrews of London, his 
father-in-law Robert Feltham of Sculthorpe, Norfolk, his uncle John 
Crane with son John, his father Robert Crane, his cousiu Cooper widow, 
his cousin Burgie widow, his cousin Robert Foulsham, his cousin John 
Voyce, his cousin Frances Stafford widow, his cousin William Foulsham, 
his cousin Robert Crane of Braintree, Essex, with son Robert, his 
cousin John Sparhawk, his cousin Bridget wife of John Vice, his cousin 
Mary Smith, his cousin John Blomfield, his cousins John Rogers and 
William Hubbard, both of Ipswich in New England. Proved at Lon- 
don, 20 August, 1670. 

Thomas Cushing, of London, in his will written 10 August, 1669, 
mentioned his sister Katherine Long, his niece Anne Cushing, his 
niece Elizabeth Cushing, Margery late wifj of his brother William 
Cushing, Godly late wife of his brother Peter Cushing, brother The- 
ophilus Cushing in New England, brother Matthew's eldest son Daniel 
Cushing who is also in New England, cousin Jeremiah Cushing also in 
New England, cousin Matthew Cushing also in New England, cousin 
John Cushing also in New England. Proved at London, 25 April, 

Philip Lovering, of ship Falcon, by his nuncupative will dated 
17 September, 1680, gave all to his son Philip Lovering and William 
Walley, to be divided, meaning his son Philip Lovering there present, 
and William Walley, now in Charlestown, New England. Proved at 
London, 20 October, 1 680. 

Joseph Cooke in his will mentioned his brother Nicholas Cooke, with 
wife Mary, and their youngest son Joseph now residing in Virginia. 
Proved at London in 1687. 

John Goding in his will bequeathed to his mother his estates in 
Virginia, England, and elsewhere, and his debts in Virginia, England, 
or elsewhere. Proved at London in 1687. 



John Greene, late of the parish of Petsoe, co. Gloucester in Virginia, 
now of the parish of St. Buttolph's without Aldgate, London, in his 
will written 16 April, 1685, being about to go to Virginia, made his wife 
Ann his attorney, and gave to his wife his six hundred acres of land in 
Petsoe, Virginia, with dwelling-houses, etc., thereon, which were giveu 
to him by the will of his late father, John Greene. Proved at London, 
8 January, 1693. 

Elizabeth Fawkner, of Epsom, co. Surrey, widow, left a long will 
dated 4 June, 1720, in which she named her late husband Mr. Everard 
Fawkner, his nephew Thomas Bulkley, " now or late Factor at Fort 
St. George in the East Indies," her cousin Edward Bulkley with wife 
Sarah and daughter Elizabeth, her nephew Everard Fawkner and his 
sisters Sarah, Jane, and Susanna, the " children or grandchildren of my 
uncles Edward Bulkley, Peter Bulkley, and Gershom Bulkley late of 
New England as shall be living at the time of my decease," together 
with many more relatives and other persons. Proved at London, 
1 July, 1720. 

Jeffry Warde, of Great Yarmouth, in his will written 4 October, 
16G5, mentioned his wife Margaret, his sister Thomasin, now or late the 
wife of Robert Buffam of New England, his sister Jane Mills widow, 
William Warde, son of his brother George, his sister Dionis Locker 
deceased, his kinsman Francis Clifton, his kinsman Benjamin Barker, 
Jeffry son of his brother George, his nephew William Warde, son of 
brother George, his nephew George, son of Toby Warde deceased, his 
brother-in-law John Riches, his nephew Jeffrey son of Toby Warde, 
his nephew Thomas son of Toby Warde, his nephew Thomas son of 
Gabriel Warde deceased, his nephew Augustine son of Toby Warde, 
Abigail widow of his brother Toby Warde, his nephew Robert son 
of brother Toby Warde. Proved at Norwich, 9 April, 1666. 

" Know all men by these presents, that, whereas I John Dinwodie of 
Hanover parish in King George's County, Rapahanick river in Virginia 
have lately come from thence where my family reside to Glascow the 
place of my nativity," etc., daughters Elizabeth and Jane, and wife 
Rose Masson, to divide the estate in Virginia, brothers Robert and 
Lawrence Dinwoodie, brother-in-law John Baird of Glascow, sisters 
Mary, Sarah, Janet, and Christian Dinwoodie, " children to be brought 
to Scotland and brought up in my native country." Proved at Edin- 
burgh, in Commissariot of Glascow, but no date is given, (? 1726). 



The Annual Meeting was held on Thursday afternoon, the 
10th instant ; the President, Mr. Winthrop, in the chair. 

The Recording Secretary's report of the last meeting was 
read and accepted. 

The Librarian's monthly list of gifts to the Library was 

The President then addressed the Society as follows: — 

We come to our Annual Meeting once more, Gentlemen, 
under circumstances of satisfaction and prosperity which may 
well make us grateful for the past and trustful for the 
future. But I leave all the details of our condition for 
the Annual Reports of our Council and Treasurer, which will 
presently be submitted to you. 

It can hardly fail to have been observed that, by a striking 
coincidence, two of our leading sister societies have succes- 
sively been bereaved of their Presidents within a few weeks 
past. John William Wallace, Esq., the late President of the 
Pennsylvania Historical Society, and the Hon. Augustus 
Schell, the President of the New York Historical Society, 
were accomplished and distinguished men, who had rendered 
valuable service in their respective spheres and whose charac- 
ters entitled them to every consideration. Our records may 
well contain this passing tribute of respect to their memories 
and of sympathy with our sister societies. 

But we need not look beyond our own rolls for those 
entitled to a special mention to-day. 

The name of the eminent French historian, Mignet, has 
stood at the head of our Foreign Honorary Roll for several 
years past, and must not be suffered to disappear in silence. 
He was elected an Honorary Member of our Society on the 
12th of April, 1860. The ocean telegram announces that he 
died in Paris on the 24th of March, in his eighty-eighth year, 
having been born at Aix, in Provence, on the 8th of May, 


Educated to the bar, he practised the law but a short time, 
aud soon turned his attention to literature and history. Estab- 
lishing himself in Paris in 1822, he commenced his career there 
as a journalist, and was engaged for ten years or more in con- 
tributing to some of the leading liberal newspapers. He was 
especially associated with his life-long friend, Thiers, in found- 
ing and conducting the "National," and with him was one of 
the signers of the famous protest against the Polignac decrees, 
which led to the downfall of Charles X. Before this, how- 
ever, he had secured for himself a widespread celebrity as 
the author of a brilliant history of the great French Revolu- 
tion of 1789. It was published as early as 1824, went through 
many editions, and was translated into many languages. I 
recall it in its English version as one of the historical works 
which interested me most deeply more than half a century 

After the Revolution of 1830, and the accession of Louis 
Philippe, Mignet was made a Councillor of State and Director 
of the Archives in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. But the 
Revolution of 1848 terminated all his official relations, and 
left him free to devote himself exclusively to his favorite his- 
torical and literary pursuits. He had become a member of the 
French Academy in 1836, and was the senior member, by 
date of election, at the time of his death, But even four 
years earlier, in 1832, he was one of the members of the 
Academy of Moral and Political Sciences — one of the five 
Academies of the Institute — on its reorganization, and was 
soon made the Perpetual Secretary, as it is called, of that 
Academy, — an office which he held for more than forty years, 
having resigned it only a year or two before his death. 

Meantime he was preparing and publishing many interesting 
and valuable volumes of historical documents and of biogra- 
phy, — among them, "Negotiations relating to the Spanish 
Succession," a charming Life of Marie Stuart, and an elabo- 
rate account of the Abdication of Charles V., and of his 
residence and death at the Monastery of Saint-Just. Other 
volumes, on the subject of the Rivalry of Charles V. and 
Francis L, and on Philip II. and Antonio Perez, have since 
followed ; while our Corresponding Associate, M. Vapereau, in 
his invaluable "Dictionnaire des Contemporains," is authority 
for an impression that Mignet had been occupied for more 

1884.] TRIBUTE TO M. MIGNET. 141 

than thirty years on a History of the Reformation, and had 
collected hundreds of volumes of manuscript correspondence 
on that subject. 

But it was as Perpetual Secretary of the Academy of Moral 
and Political Sciences that Mignet obtained his most enviable 
distinction and performed his most conspicuous service. In 
that capacity it became his duty, or at least his privilege, to 
pronounce an Moge on some one of his deceased assooiates at 
the Annual Meetings; and these meetings, in no small degree 
owing to the brilliancy of his discourses, came to be counted 
among the events of Paris. Of these discourses, published in 
successive volumes, under the title of " Notices et Portraits 
Historiques et Litteraires," I have at least three volumes, 
besides ten or twelve of his subsequent productions of the 
tame sort in the separate pamphlets published by the Insti- 
tute, all presented to me by himself. It happened that on 
my first visit to Europe, thirty-seven years ago, our historian, 
Prescott, gave me a note of introduction to our late Honorary 
Member, Count Adolphe de Circourt, who took me to the 
Annual Meeting of this Academy on the 5th of June, 1847, 
where I had the good fortune to hear Mignet deliver one of 
these discourses, and where I had the still better fortune to 
make his personal acquaintance. From that time to this I 
have never been in Paris without meeting him ; and there is 
at least one of the letters which he occasionally wrote to me 
which I should be unwilling to lose from irry file of vouchers. 
I will not read it now, but may perhaps venture to append 
it to the report of these remarks in our Proceedings. 1 

1 Instititt Imperial de France : — Academie des Sciences 
Morales et Politiqdes, Paris, le24 Juin, 1867. 

Monsieur, — L'Academie a reeu la seconde et fort interessante partie de l'ou- 
vrage que vous avez public sur votre illustre ancetre John Winthrop, gouverneur 
perpetue de la Colonie de Massachusetts, dont il a ete justement appele le pere, et 
qui, par ses services comme par ses vertus, a merite que son nora fut place dans 
le souvenir de son pays, a cote du grand nom de Washington. 

L'Academie m'a charge de vous transmettre ses remerciments que j'aurais du 
vous addresser depuis quelque temps a Boston, et que je vous fais parvenir un 
peu tardivement a Londres, oil j'ai appris, par M. de Circourt, que vous deviez 
arriver le 23 Juin. Cette seconde partie de la vie et des lettres de John Win- 
throp a ete placee, par l'ordre de l'Academie, dans la bibliotheque de l'lnstitut, a 
cote de la premiere partie qu'elle complete si heureusement. 

Agreez, Monsieur, la nouvelle assurance de ma haute consideration. 

Monsieur Robert C. Winthrop. 


Thirteen years after I had first met him, and listened with 
so much delight to one of his discourses, I was privileged to 
hear a second. This last, on the 26th of May, 1860, was in 
many ways a memorable occasion. It was during the Second 
Empire, and at a moment when Napoleon III., by act or 
threat, had rendered himself particularly obnoxious to men 
of Mignet's independent and liberal spirit. The old hall of 
the Institute is not a large one, — accommodating hardly more 
than four or five hundred persons, galleries and all. It was 
crowded on that day by the most notable literary characters 
of France, with not a few distinguished ladies. Guizot and 
Thiers, Lamartine, Victor Cousin and Villemain, Remusat, 
Barthelemy St. Hilaire, and Chevalier, and I know not who 
all, were in their seats as members. In the corners of the 
hall, where they had been from the foundation of the Insti- 
tute, were the old statues of Bossuet and Fenelon, Descartes 
and Sully. Soldiers of the line, with their bayonets, stood in 
the aisles ; gens-d'armes, on foot and mounted, were around the 
palace ; ushers in costume conducted us to our seats, and the 
principal officers of the Academy were in their embroidered 
coats. All this was according to usages long ago established, 
and observed to this day. 

The President of the occasion, the Director of the Academy 
for that day, M. Louis Reybaud, opened the exercises, as I 
well remember, with a brief address, assigning the prizes of 
the last year, and announcing the subjects of competition for 
the next year. And then M. Mignet, in his uniform, came 
forward to the Secretary's desk, and proceeded to pronounce 
an tUloge on M. le Comte Portalis, a distinguished statesman 
and member of the Academy, who had died two years before, 
at eighty years of age, after a life of varied and important 
political and literary service. 

Nothing could have been more interesting or impressive 
than this discourse, or more felicitous in composition and 
delivery. Though never rising from his chair, and using his 
manuscript from beginning to end, he held his audience in 
rapt attention for an hour and a half; and every one would 
gladly have heard him for an hour and a half longer. There 
was a charm of voice and manner, a beauty of diction, a dis- 
tinctness of articulation, and a force of utterance in Mignet, 
which could hardly be excelled or exceeded. He recalled to 

1884.] TRIBUTE TO M. MIGNET. 143 

me our lamented Everett, who has had no superior, if any- 
equal, in occasional oratory in our own land, if in any other. 
Mignet was a person of singular personal elegance and beauty, 
sometimes even designated familiarly as " le beau Mignet ; " 
and his whole air and aspect while engaged in the delivery of 
one of these discourses were of the most attractive and fasci- 
nating sort. Some of these discourses in themselves were 
works of art, — biographical cameos, exquisitely cut and set 
in jewels of history and literature. One might well apply 
to more than one of them the words which he used in regard 
to the Biographical Essays of Macaulay, in his Moge on that 
" Prince of Essayists,'' — 

" Cette serie variee de belles etudes historiques et litteraires dans 
lesquelles il a seme tant d'ingenieux aperqus, porte des jugements si 
delicats et si fermes, repandu des theories saines et hautes, ou l'imagina- 
tion se montre souvent, l'esprit ne manque jamais, la pensee eclate et 
le talent abonde. D'un ordre eleve et d'une execution originate, ces 
Etudes, qui ont fait appeler M. Macaulay dans son pays, par une ex- 
pression inusitee dans le notre, le Prince des Essayistes, sont des mor- 
ceaux rares de litteiature et d'histoire." 

His subject on this occasion gave him a wide scope. He 
would almost seem to have selected it with a purpose. The 
life and career of Count Portalis and his father covered the 
period of both Empires and of the intervening reigns and 
revolutions. Mignet was familiar with them all, and found 
not a few striking parallelisms between the scenes he was de- 
scribing and the events which were going on around him at 
the moment of his discourse. But it was enough for him to 
recount the past, and leave the application to be made by 
his hearers. He knew how to make happy hits, and even, 
sometimes, severe strictures, without any resort to personality 
or any sacrifice of dignity. All the more telling were his 
indirect allusions to the existing condition and the actual 
government of his country. No one of them failed to be 
understood and appreciated. It was not a little amusing to 
watch the countenances of some of the Imperialists present 
during the more salient and suggestive passages of the dis- 
course. There was even a rumor in the air that he had 
given offence in the highest quarters, and that the Academy 
might suffer from the Emperor's displeasure. But while 


Mignet was not of a complexion to be overawed or intimi- 
dated by any such apprehensions, he was careful to observe 
all the proprieties of his position, and to leave nothing posi- 
tive or palpable for Imperial censure. It was altogether a 
masterly effort, and one which gave me the strongest impres- 
sion of his ability as a writer and of his consummate art as an 

It has happened to me, in repeated visits to France, to find 
myself in the way of hearing not a few of her great modern 
orators. I have heard Guizot and Thiers, Jules Favre and 
Rouher, in the Tribune ; Dupin aine, at the bar ; Coquerel, 
Bersier, and Pere Hyacinthe, in the pulpit; and, quite re- 
cently, M. Renan, at the Institute : and I have brought away 
a very high idea of French eloquence. I might have derived 
a still more exalted impression of it, could I have heard some 
one of the great efforts of Berryer in the Halls of Justice ; or 
the splendid speech with which Lamartine confronted and 
drove back the red flag of the Commune at the HOtel de 
Ville in 1848 ; or the superb eulogy of the great Bishop of 
Orleans, Dupanloup, on General Lamoriciere, which Mignet 
himself once told me was hardly inferior to anything of 
Bossuet. But as it is, I look back on the two discourses 
which I was privileged to hear from the lips of Mignet as 
models par eminence, in diction and delivery, of the kind of 
oratory which belonged to the occasions which called them 
forth ; and the remembrance of them has often given me the 
inspiration and the example for efforts in the same line. 

He did not confine himself to his own compatriots in be- 
stowing the honors of these anniversary tributes. Brougham 
and Macaulay of England shared them, in their turn, with 
Ancillon and Savigny of Germany, and with Sismoncli and 
Rossi of Geneva or Italy, as well as with Talleyrand and De 
Tocqueville and De Broglie and Victor Cousin of his own 

Nor, certainly, may I forget that among his portraits and 
historical notices will be found an eloquent discourse on our 
own Edward Livingston, the author of the Louisiana Code, 
and the writer of the grand Proclamation against Nullifica- 
tion, issued in 1830 by President Jackson, to whom he was 
then Secretary of State. Still less can I fail to recall the 
admirable little Life of Franklin, which Mignet prepared and 

1881.] TRIBUTE TO M. MIGNET. 145 

published under the auspices and by order of the Institute, 
as one of a series of tracts for the instruction of the people, 
when France had established a republican government in 1848. 
These two productions alone would have entitled his name to 
a welcome and honored place on our rolls and in our respect. 

One of the last utterances of Mignet was his brief but 
brilliant address, in association with Jules Simon and L6on 
Say, at the inauguration of the statue of his beloved friend 
Thiers, at St. Germain-en-laye. This was as lately as the 19th 
of September, 1880, after he had entered on his eighty-fifth 
year, when he paid a touching and exquisite tribute to one 
whom he spoke of as for more than forty years his confrere 
in the Academy, and for more than sixty years his intimate, 
confidential friend. Two years later still, in May, 1882, I 
visited him at his apartments in the Rue D'Aumale, and 
found him genial and cordial as ever, with his pen in his hand 
and a pile of manuscript on his table, evidently engaged in 
historical composition, and promising, by the lumen juventce 
purpureum still lingering on his charming countenance, to live 
and labor for many years to come. 

My last glimpse of him was at the Institute, a few days later 
still, when he was enjoying with the youngest the sparkling 
wit and eloquence of Cherbuliez and Renan, and witnessing 
a scene which furnished a striking illustration of the widely 
contrasted varieties of accomplishment and achievement which 
are included in the charmed circle of that famous body, while 
the brilliant philologist and critic Renan was welcoming the 
captivating romance-writer Cherbuliez to the chair which had 
lately been vacated, among the Forty Immortals, by a grave 
and dignified jurist and minister of state, — Dufaure. 

There I left Mignet for the last time, and there I leave 
him now ; assured that there he will be longest remembered, 
and that there he would most desire to be remembered. 
Among all those forty, and the many times other fort}^, with 
whom he was associated during so protracted a membership, 
no other one certainly will have deserved or secured a more 
endeared and cherished memory. 

I must detain you, Gentlemen, a few minutes longer. 
From our Corresponding Roll, since our last meeting, we 
have lost Dr. Alfred Langdon-Elwyn, who died at Philadel- 



phia on the 15th ult° in his eight} T -nrst year. He was born in 
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on the 9th of July, 1804, and 
was a grandson of the eminent John Langdon, a former gov- 
ernor of New Hampshire, who in 1789 was the first presiding 
officer of the Senate of the United States, when Congress as- 
sembled for the inauguration of Washington as President. 

Dr. Langdon-Elwyn was of the class of 1823 at Harvard 
College, and was graduated a Doctor of Medicine at the Uni- 
versity of Pennsylvania in 1831. Residing abroad for several 
years, and attending the medical lectures and hospitals in 
Paris and elsewhere, he brought home many anecdotes of the 
famous doctors whom he had known and studied with. But 
he did not engage seriouslv in the practice of his profession, 
devoting himself rather to natural history and practical phi- 
lanthropy. Fixing his home in Philadelphia, he became a 
member of the Pennsylvania Academy of Natural Sciences, a 
fellow of the American Philosophical Society, and a member, 
and at one time a Vice-President, of the Pennsylvania His- 
torical Society. He had a taste and a talent, also, for Botany 
and Agriculture, had a fine farm, tilled his own fields, and 
was, for a longer or shorter time, President of the old Phila- 
delphia Agricultural Society, — one of the oldest, if not the 
very oldest, in our country. At the same time he was promi- 
nent and active in many worthy associations of a moral and 
benevolent character, and was President of the Pennsylvania 
Institute for the Instruction of the Blind, of the School for 
Feeble-minded Children, and of the Society for the Preven- 
tion of Cruelty to Animals. 

Our own Society, of which he was chosen a Corresponding 
Member in 1880, has reason to remember him as having con- 
tributed a collection of interesting autograph papers to our 
archives, and as having published a handsome volume of the 
letters of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and others to his 
grandfather, John Langdon, of which he sent a copy to our 
Library. A privately printed religious poem of his — which 
never went, I believe, beyond the circle of his friends — gave 
a vivid impression of his faith and piety. He was a man of 
some eccentricities, but full of intelligence, amiability, and 
hospitality. Webster and Ticknor and Jeremiah Mason were 
familiar guests in his mother's old home at Portsmouth; and 
his family had many friends in our own city, among whom 


I may count those nearest and dearest to me, as well as 

I must not conclude these introductory remarks without 
presenting to our Library, in the name of its author, Daniel 
Goodwin, Jr., Esq., of Chicago, a very interesting and valu- 
able memoir of ki The Dearborns," — a commemorative dis- 
course delivered before the Chicago Historical Society, on the 
eightieth anniversary of the occupation of Fort Dearborn and 
the first settlement of Chicago, in December last. It gives an 
excellent account of the career and character of General 
Henry Dearborn and of his son General Henry Alexander 
Scammell Dearborn, both of whom were long conspicuous 
in the histoiy of our country and our Commonwealth ; and it 
is illustrated by portraits of them both. The father was a 
gallant officer of the Revolution from Bunker Hill to York- 
town, and afterwards Secretary of War and Commander-in- 
Chief of the United States Army. The son was Collector of 
the Customs in this city, a Member of Congress from Norfolk, 
first President of the Massachusetts Horticultural Society, 
and prominently associated with the erection of the Bunker 
Hill Monument and the establishment of the Mount Auburn 

Our thanks are due, and will be returned with the sanction 
of the Society, to Mr. Goodwin, for so just and admirable a 
tribute to these patriotic and public-spirited men, so long 
known and honored in our own community. 

Mr. Roger Wolcott, of Boston, was elected a Resident 
Member of the Society. 

Dr. Green recalled a question that has been raised several 
times in regard to the name " Windsor " as applied to certain 
chairs. References to the subject were made at the October 
meeting of 1879, and again at the October meeting of 1880. 
He said that in the " Private Correspondence of Horace 
Walpole " (London, 1820), allusions are found which may 
furnish a clew to the answer. Walpole, in a letter dated 
" Strawberry-hill, Aug. 20, 1761," writes to George Mon- 
tagu, Esq., that u Dickey Bateman has picked up a whole 
cloister full of old chairs in Herefordshire" (vol. ii. p. 279). 
Who "Dickey Bnteman" was is not recorded; but Walpole 


makes another reference to him in a letter to the Rev. 
Mr. Cole, dated "March 9, 1765," where he says (vol. hi. 

P. 24) r- 

"Mr. Bateman has got a cloister at Old Windsor, furnished with 
ancient wooden chairs, most of them triangular, but all of various pat- 
terns, and carved and turned in the most uncouth and whimsical forms. 
He picked them up one by one, for two, three, five, or six shillings 
apiece from different farm-houses in Herefordshire." 

Perhaps Walpole, in this quotation, did not mean a monastic 
cloister, as he says, a little further on, that he himself would 
like two such chairs for his cloister. 

Mr. Charles F. Adams, Jr., communicated the following 
paper : — 

Among the manuscripts belonging to the Society is one 
known as Marshall's Diary. I have recently had occasion to 
examine it carefully in connection with historical work I have 
in hand. The book is not of sufficient value to warrant print- 
ing it in full ; and I have therefore prepared a memorandum 
of its contents for the Proceedings of the Society, which will 
save future investigators the trouble of consulting the original. 
I have intended to leave nothing of importance without such 
a reference as will enable any one interested to find it at once 
in the diary. This memorandum will therefore serve both as 
an index and as an abstract. 

John Marshall was born in Boston, Oct. 2, 1664. A mason 
by trade, he subsequently lived in that part of the original 
town of Braintree which is now Quincy. His diary, if such it 
may be called, covers the period from 1697 to 1711. It con- 
sists of the most meagre possible memoranda ; a page being 
given to each month, and, as a rule, a line or less to each 
day. At the foot of every page it was also his custom to 
note down any event of general moment which he had heard 
or read of during the month to which that page was devoted. 
Here and there in the book a few facts are jotted down which 
still have a local interest in Quincy ; but as a whole the diary 
is chiefly valuable as giving in small compass a record of the 
daily life of an industrious, skilled workman living in a 
country town close to Boston at an early period of New 

1884.] john Marshall's diary. 149 

England development. Marshall's regular wages at his trade 
seem to have been four shillings, or sixty-six and two-thirds 
cents, per day. The extent of territory over which he sought 
and received employment is very noticeable. He constantly 
worked in Boston and on Castle Island, as well as in Ilingham, 
Weymouth, Milton, Dorchester, Med field, and elsewhere. 
There were also few things to which he did not turn his 
hand when regular work was slack. He was a non-com mis- 
sioned officer in the Braintree company, an active member of 
the parish, and for several years he served as precinct constable. 
He farmed on a small scale, made laths in winter, painted 
houses, acted as a carpenter and messenger, burned bricks, and 
bought and sold stock. He was deeply religious, and on his 
birthday such entries as the following are found : — 

" This is written October 1 st in the evening and to morrow is my 
birth day. I am now 40 years old and cannot but be ashamed to 
look back and consider how I have spent my past time, being at a 
great losse whether ever any true grace be wrought in my soul or no: 
corruption in me is very powerfull. grace (if any) is very weak and 
languid. I have reason to pray as the spous, awake o north wind, and 
come thou south wind and blow upon my garden, to stir up my self 
to take hold of God. to engage my cry to the Lord and my whole man 
in his service, which the Lord enable me to doe." 

The volume was presented to this Society by the Rev. T. 
M. Harris. There should, I think, be other volumes covering 
subsequent years ; but apparently they have been lost. How 
this volume happened to be preserved, does not appear. It 
has already been freely used by historical investigators. The 
late Dr. W. P. Lunt in particular not only went over it with 
much care in 1840, when preparing his two discourses on 
the Two Hundredth Anniversary of the First Congregational 
Church of Quincy, but in the appendix to those discourses he 
printed (pp. 108-11) everything of any moment which Mar- 
shall had noted down connected with the North Precinct 
Church of Braintree. These extracts are chiefly of local 
interest, and have already been used ; I have not therefore 
thought it worth while to refer to them again here. They 
can be found with Dr. Lunt's sermons. 

The regular monthly memoranda begin with January, 1697. 
They are well described by the writer at the head of the 


thirteenth page of the book, the preceding pages being 
devoted to jottings, lists of names, etc., of no value. Mar- 
shall's words are as follows : — 

" Heer is contained in this booke some breif memorialls of my own 
buisnes how I spend my time, what work I do, and wheir : some re- 
markeable providences recorded, and the weather remembred." 

The following is a fair specimen of the entries : — 

1 I was idle it being winter weather the private meeting at my 

3 the sabbath my letter of dismission read an order for a publick 

5 I went to hull with ensign peniman and brother Parmenter. 

6 Came home againe from hull. 
12 made 300 lathes 

13. 300 more 

14. A General fast through the Province. 
26. I went to Boston mother being gone. 

27-28. at Boston among my friends and there fell a Litell snow. 

In February the writer seems to have been idle most of his 
time, though on one or two days he " Rent a few Lathes." 
On the 16th he went to Weymouth lecture ; on the 17th he 
digged stones for his cellar walls ; on the 19th he went to the 
mill ; on the 20th to Milton ; on the 27th to Boston, getting 
home at night. At the close of the month he notes : — 

"On the 10 day about a quarter of an hour before sun rise hapened 
an earthquake: the weather was cold, the ground hard frozen: Litell 
wind heard ; yet the ground in some places shook extreamly ; to the 
great teror and afrightment of severall, tho it Lasted but a very Litell 
time: ther is a discorse of an earthquake at Taunton and at Wren - 
tham at the same time, the truth of which I know not." 

July 28, 1697. Samuel Tomson was this day sollemly admonished 
by the church. [See also December following.] 

Remarks on July, 1697. "This month of July the people of God 
in this province have had the awfull tokens of divine displeasure on 
them, for besides the sore and long continued drought, which hath 
been distressing in allmost all places, the wrath of God hath appeared 
divers other ways: the enemy indians to the eastward did much hurt 
in this month : every week brought us the sad notices of it : 


" the 4 th day of this month being the Lords day, the worshipful 
major Frost of Kittery was killed and scallped by the indians as ho 
was going from the publick worship : he was a godly and choice sperited 
man, a member of the councell for this province." 

Notes the death on the same day of Mr. Joshua Moodey of Ports- 
mouth, " a zealos and lively preacher of the word of God : a man 
mighty in prayer. Jacob like he would weep and make suplication." 
Also the death of the Rev. Benjamin Esterbrook of " the place known 
by the name of Camebridge farms." 

" The sore drought continueing God put it into the hearts of some of 
his servants to seek him by prayer and fasting for the desired showers 
of rain : many of the towns and churches observed such days, as the 
church in Dorchester and in Bridgewater and in Weymouth, to all of 
which the prayers of his people God gave a gracious answer some time 
on the same day such answer came 

" the force of prayer." 

Remarks on August, 1697. "Although in the last month we had 
some small showers of Rain whereby the corn was preserved from 
perishing uterly, yet ther had not been a soaking plentifull Rain since 
the month of May till the 3 d of this month : and then it rained moder- 
ately most part of the day, and all the night following it Rained most 
plentifully, insomuch that Rivers and Brooks rise very considerably 
by reason thereof: a very great mercy, the sabbath before the first 
Church in Boston agreed to keep Thursday following as a day of fasting 
and prayer to aske rain, the mercy came before the day came : But it 
was kept acordingly." 

Notes also the fight with Indians at Wood Island, Me. ; " George Witly 
who belonged to Braintree was killed." 

On the 24th a ship, Edward Lillye, master, lost on Cape Cod. 

September. Notes French cruisers on the coast, " the 5 th of this 
month being the Lords day the French took 5 sloops at Plimouth, 
some of which was loaded with hay." On the 11th Indians attack 
Lancaster, and kill " the Reverend Mr John Whiteing, pastor of the 
church of Christ there." On the 12th a skirmish with Indians at 
Damariscove, Major John March commanding the English, Captain 
Demmick killed, and Captain Phillips of Charlestown and Captain 
Whiteing of Connecticut wounded, the latter in the head. A ship 
on the 24th lost on Harding's Ledge, and Deborah Kembell drowned 
going from Boston to Hull. 

" On the 28 of September 1697, in the evening my wife was delivered 
of a daughter, who was the Sabbath after Baptized By Mr Fisk, named 
Mary. She is alive to this day. is now a maryed woman, her husbands 
name is Benjamin Soper. She is the mother of 3 children, one son and 


2 (laughters : she is this day 30 years of age, September 28, 1727 : 
The Lord multiply his Blessings on her." 

October. Notes that on the 6th " Mr Henery Gibbs was ordained at 
Watertowne though not without some disturbance from some of the 
inhabitants of that towne." On the 28th " dyed the famous Mr Samuell 
Hooker, the Learned and much Lamented pastor of the church of 
christ in Farmington, Connecticott." 

December. Notes at length the death and burial of the Rev. Mr. 
John Bailey, formerly of Limerick in Ireland, and his brother Thomas. 
" At the latter end of this month people in many towns and places 
began to fall sick of a sore cold atended with a cough and feavor 
which proved mortal to some." 

1698. January. "This month of January past was in respect of 
snow and cold more than ordinary bad. We had 10 clays together 
pinching pearceing cold: and much snow. Also the sickness began 
last month this month extended to allmost all familys. Few or none 
escaped, and many dyed specially in Boston, and some dyed in a strange 
and unusuall maner. in some familys all weer sick to gether, in some 
townes allmost all weer sick so that it was a time of sore distres." 

February. " 9 (Wednesday.) a private fast in Bran tree and a 
gathering for the poor." 

Notes. "Their dyed in Brantree in the year 1697, 12 grown per- 
sons, . . . also 12 children." On the 5th "dyed the honourable 
Collonell Sam 1 Shrimpton a member of the Councell." Also the Indians 
attacked Andover, killing five persons and rifling the house of Major 
Dudley Bradstreet, Esq., carrying off him and his wife, but shortly 
letting them go. " Allso this month was a very sickly time in many 
towns : people haveing a strange and unusuall cold of which many dyed 
in some places, and some very sudenly. But toward the end of it the 
sicknes abated. 

" Allso this winter hath been a sore and tedyous winter pinching cold 
and much snow. By reason of which many weer pinched with want : 
the drought last year and hard winter caused many to want hay. and 
many Cattell dyed." 

March. " 7 Town meeting to choos constables and other oficers, 
the ofice of a constable i narowly escaped, By 18 votes: Mr Rawson 
19 — no more : he served." 

Notes the death of Bartholomew Gidney, Esq., " a member of the 
Councell. Collonel of the regiment for the County of Essex." 

April 22. " went to Boston to fetch my wife and Mary, they went 
in the boat last Munday." 

Notes the death of the Rev. Mr. Charles Morton, pastor of the church 
of Christ in Charlestown. 

May 1 

1 s. 

May 22 


July 3 

1 s. 

August 7 

1 s. 

Aug. 28 

1 s. 

Dec r 4 

1 s. 

January 1 


January 8 



An account of money given to the contribution this year, 1C98: 


April 30 1 skill. 

May 14 8 pence 

June 18 1 shiling 

July 20 8 pence 

Sep r 3 8 pence 

Oct r 15 6 pence 

Novem r 12 4 pence 

Dec r 24 1 shilling 

Feb. 25 1 shilling 

September. " About the middle of this month a young woman was 
executed at Springfield for murdering her bastard child." 

October. "At the superior court the last Tuesday of this month 
Sarah Threenedles was arraigned for murdering her bastard child and 
on tryal was found guilty: and therefore was condemned to dye." 

November 17. "this day Sarah Threenedles sufered." 

Notes " God's mercy to the church in Cambridge farms who after 
a sore bereaveing stroak in the death of Mr Easterbrooks last year was 
now again resettled : Mr John Hancock being ordained over them in 
the Lord the 2 d day of this November." 

" Allso the young woman named S. T. condemned last month was 
executed the 17 of this." 

" Toward the close of this month we had a generall Contribution 
through the Province for some that are in captivity in macaness 
[Mequinez] a place in Barbary under the emperor of Morocco." 

" 1699. May. I did not hear of any great matter which hapened : 
only we had severall sick with an unusuall distemper called the mumps 
of which some weer bad. But none dyed, that I heard of. Great 
expectations we had of his excellency RICHARD earl of Bellomont : 
and great preparations to entertain him : who came to Boston on Fry day 
the 26 of this May: and to receive him ther was I think twenty 
companys of souldiers of which 3 weer troops, and such a vast con- 
course of people as my poor eys never saw the like before : the life- 
guard went to Roadisland to wait on him : two troops went to Dedham 
to meet him their: and when he came to Boston we made a guard, 
from the end of the towne to the South meeting; house, the life guard 
rode foremost then came some oficers : next his Lordship and Count- 
ess : then the troops and other gentlemen : the drums beat the trumpets 
did sound, the Coullors weer displayed: the Cannons and ordinance 
from the ships and fortifications did roar : all manner of expressions of 
Joy : and to end all Fireworks and good drink at night." 

June. "His excellency went to view the castle on June 12: and 



discharging some of the canon their according to the usuall manner on 
such occasions, one broke, and two men weer killed one the same 
minute : the chiefe guner his name was Nathaniel Holmes, one other 
named Samuel Proctor dyed four days after." 

September. "The woods swarmed much with Bears, many weer 
killed, and more escaped, whether it doth not portend any strange 
Providence to come is to us as yet unknowne." 

" On the 13 day Mr Nathaniel Hunting was ordained pastor of the 
church at East Hampton on Long island." 

October 3 and 4. "diged Mr Quinsey's tomb. ... 14 at tomb all 
day, 15 the sab. 16 at tomb: and put the corps in and so left it." 

Notes that on the 26th " the Reverend Mr Sam 11 Man of Wrentham 
had his house and all in it burned, in the dead of the night no man 
knows how." 

November 7. " Ben Neall caught a wollfe of which I cutt off the ears 
when dead." 

Notes death of Thomas Danforth on the 5th day of the month, who 
" had a cheif hand under God in puting an end to the troubles under 
which the Country Groaned anno 1692." About the 25th " ther was a 
Liberall Contribution for the Rev d Mr Samuell Man. By which his 
Great Losse was in some measure repaired againe." 

1700. Jauuary. Notes that: — " A ship came from Fmgland called 
a man of warre to carry home the pyrates ther to receive punishment: and 
she went away about the beginning of March following: and we heard 
by Cap. Green who arived May 22 d they had a passage of But 3 
weeks : and on July 1 1 th ten of them weer executed at execution dock, 
as we had certain intiligence afterward." 

February. " On the 14 th of this month dyed in Boston the aged and 
Reverend Mr Thornton : who was formerly minster at Yarmouth." 

Notes contributions in 1700-3, amounting to 3 s. in 1700 ; 2 s. 8 d. in 
1701 ; 5 s. 4d. in 1702 ; 3 s. 8 d. in 1703. 

March " 8 went to Weymouth Mr John Rogers was this day or- 
dained Rulling elder of the Church in Weymouth : By Mr Torrey." 

April " 3 went to Boston with a Roge that ran away from me." 

May. Notes that " about the middle of the moneth dyed the Rev d 
Mr Hale minister at Beverly : a great loss to the country in generall, 
and to that poor town in perticuler." 

June. Notes on the 17th the death of John Eyre, Esq., " a godly and 
choice spirited man " at Boston ; and on the 28th the death of Mr. James 
Blake, " ruling elder of the church of Christ " at Dorchester. 

July. Notes the death, on the 20th, of the Rev. Mr. Ichabod Wiswall 
of Duxbury, " a man of eminent accomplishment for the service of the 

August. " 14. was a day of fasting and prayer observed by the 


Church and people of Brain tree, ocasioncd partly by the late severe 
drought, partly for fear of the enimy, partly in order to the settlement 
of the Church with a ruling elder and deacons." 

Notes the death of Adam Winthrop, Esq., in Boston ; also of Mrs. 
Susanah Dawes. On the 28th Mr. Ebenezer Pemberton was ordained 
pastor for the South Church in Boston. " About this time many 
persons dyed at Boston, especially children, of a bloody flux and 
feaver. and some dyed of it in the Country." 

October. Notes that " 2 ministers at this time viz. Mr Peter 
Thacher and Mr John Danforth went to Road island to examine some 
persons of their knowledge in the things of God and baptize them, 
they baptized at the island 26 : and at Saconet 60 or thereabouts." 

1701. March " 13 at Jo Adams a ground pining." 

April. Notes that the wife of Jonathan Fuller of Dedham, who 
" had the esteem of a very pious woman yet fell into a mallencholly fit 
toward the close of her life through, the mallice of Satan and the 
Righteous permision of God in which mallencholly pang it is feared she 
cast herself into the well and so dyed." 

May " 19 went to Major Hunts to answer Sol Vezey Jackanapes." 

July. Notes at length the death, on the 7th, of " Willyum Stoughton 
Esquire," and mentions his public services ; " he was interred at Dor- 
chester the 15 day of July: with great honnor and solemnity and with 
him much of New Englands glory." 

December. " as to this year past it hath through the goodness of 
God been a quiet year to us in New England, we had discours of war 
all Summer Long But it was only discourse : we had generall health 
in most of the towns and a pretty good crop of Indian and english grain 
and hay : so that we had no complaining in our streets. God frowned 
on the Land by the death of our governor the earle of Bellomont Last 
March And by the death of the Deputy Gouvernour Stoughton in July 
Last past, and sundry others of great worth dyed this year as the Rev d 
Mr Willyam Brimsmead of Marlbourough. Yet among all these sad 
providences God remembered mercy for his poor people by speriting 
the remaining of our Councellors to their work. By which the Coun- 
try was put into a posture of defence against enemyes." 

1702. February. Notes at length the crime of Esther Rodgers, 
executed at Ipswich, July 31, 1701, for the murder of her child, and 
refers to three sermons preached thereon in Ipswich. 

June. " the distemper of the Small Pox began in Boston : and all 
though the report of it at first caused fear in many yet none dyed of it 
in severall weeks, and such as had it, had it very favourably : by reason 
whereof it was the more slightly accounted of: But before the country 
was clear of it many lost their lives by it. 

August. " The small pox began to spread in Boston about this time : 


the first that dyed of it was the wife of one Pits, a butcher : August 5 th 

September. " The small pox haveing beenln Boston some months 
whereof a few only dyed, but in the above month of September it grew 
very mortall, severall dyed of it. it was attended with a sort of feaver 
called the scarlett feaver. divers of all sorts old and young, male and 
female fell by it : it was allso a sore time of drought : the Churches in 
the severall towns kept days of fasting and prayer to entreat the divine 
favor for our poor Land." 

October. " Many dyed in Boston of the feavor and small pox, so 
that it was a time of sore distress : the 22 d was a day of fasting and 
prayer through the province." 

November. li By reason of the small pocks in Boston the Generall 
Court sat at Cambridge : allthough they did not do any great matter 
that ever I heard of : many dyed in Boston of the feaver and small 

December. " Through the great mercy of God we in Brantree weer 
in health thus far in this sick and dying time, only a few children weer 
sick. But at Boston many dyed allthough the feaver was not so bad 
now as in time past, yet the small pocks was very Bad. so that I may 
truly call to mind the words of the prophet, the Lords anger is not 
turned away. But his hand is stretched out still." 

1703. February, "the small pox haveing been very sore a long 
time in Boston it began to abate in this month of February." 

Notes the death of Colonel John Pynchon of Springfield, " who had 
been a magistrate 50 years." 

March. Notes the death of the Rev. Mr. Jabez Fox of Woburn, on 
the 1st; and of Mrs. Hollman of Milton on the same day. 

April. Notes the death, on the 8th, of " James Oliver physician, a 
man beloved, pious and usefull above many." 

October. Notes the death of Captain Richard Sprague of Charles- 
town, who " gave the sum of £400 to harvard Colledge." 

November. 17 " at night my wife was in travell all night: 18 my 
wife was delivered of a daughter whose name is Deliverance : about 10 
of the clock : and about 4 in the afternoon she was delivered of a son 
which was still born. She had a very sore travell." 

20. " I buryed my poor litell infant, weather cold. 21 the Sab. 
Deliverance baptized." 

28. " The sabbeth and a very sore storm of snow and haill. in this 
storm I beleive the snow fell near 18 inches on a levell. by reason 
of the storm we had but one exercise in publick this Lords day." 

Notes the unusual severity of the weather during the month, and the 
death of Ensign John Bullin of Medfield while felling a tree. 

December. " It may and ought to be noted in order to our thank- 

1884.] john Marshall's diary. 157 

fullness that this Summer past we had as seasonable weather for the 
makeing the earth fruitfull as is usually known. So that this Winter 
provission hath been more plenty and cheap than is frequently known, 
beef for 6 farthings per pound, pork at 2 d the most, the best 2 d | : 
indian 2 shillings per bushell. mault barley at 2s, and G' 1 and the whole 
winter was a time of Genrall health Allthough the winter was as hard 
and cold, long and tedious as any I ever knew." 

Notes the great storm in Europe of the 2Gth of November, giving the 
details thereof as " sent from England by dr Increase Mather." 

1704. January. "41 bought a hog of Nathaneel Spear weighed 260 
pound, came to 3 pound 3 shillings, and a quarter beef of brother 
Brackett weighed 74 pound came to 12 shilings. 5 salted beef and 

February. Notes the sack of Deerfield by the Indians, and the cap- 
tivity of Mr. Williams, and the killing of Mrs. Williams, " daughter to. 
the Rev d Mr Eleazer Mather." 

April. Notes the death, on the 22d, of Colonel " Daniell Peirce Esqr 
of Newberry " — " and whereas on the 6 and 7 and 8 days was a sore 
storm a small French privateer who came from Port Royall to rob our 
corn vessells was by reason of stress of weather drove on shoar and the 
men being 37 in all weer seized by our English men and all brought to 
Boston : this is to be acknowledged a very mercyfull providence." 

May. Notes Captain Benjamin Church's expedition to Port 

June. "13 was a muster in Brantree to press men for the Countrys 
servise among whom I was impressed for one : 14 I went to the Gov- 
ernour and got a clearance from the impress." 

Notes the execution, on the 30th, of Captain Quelch [Welch] and 
five more for piracy. 

August. Notes Indian raids on Lancaster, Groton, and Marlborough, 
carrying away four children from the latter place. 

October. Notes the death, on the 12th, of Deacon Diar of Wey- 
mouth ; the ordination, on the 25th, of Mr. Breck of Marlborough ; the 
attack of Groton by Indians and the death of Davis ; the burning of 
the house of Nathaniel Rogers at Strawberry Bank ; the death of Andrew 
Gardiner, minister of Lancaster. 

December " 2 bought a hog of Nat Spear weyed 148 pounds for 32 

Notes the death, on the 8th, of " Mr Thomas Clarke pastor of the 
church of Chelmsford, and Madam John Leverett "descended of the 
honorable family of the Sedgwicks." 

" allso in this month some French prisoners got on board a sloop 
fitted for sea and ran away with her leaveing the English owners to 
lament their loss." 


1705. February. "26 at home all day wife sick. 27 went to Boston 
for nesesarys." 

March. Notes the death, on the 3d, of Aaron Hobart of Hingham ; 
and on the 16th, of the Rev. Edward Thompson of Marshfield. 

April. Notes the death, on the 25th, of old Mr. Hinckley at Barn- 

May " 21 a training in Brantree Capt. Quinsey and Capt. Mils 
first training." 

June. Notes the death, on the 9th, of the Rev. Mr. Michael Wiggles- 
worth of Maiden. 

August. Notes the blowing up of powder works at Dorchester on 
the 29 th of the month. 

1706. January. Notes at length a very severe snow-storm on the 
29-30th, and the death, on the 20th, of " Lady Mary, formerly wife to 
the honorable Sir Willyam Phipps Kt. But at her death the wife of 
Peter Sergeant Esq." 

June "14 We raised Mr Quinzeys house." 

Note. " On the 1 9 day old Mrs Beers widdow of Cap* Richard Beers 
dyed, who was aged 92 years and had lived in New England 76 years: 
who at her death had a grand daughter who is a grand mother." 

July " 29 I layd the foundation of Mr Quinzeys chimnies." 

August "17 Coulouring the pedements at Mr Quinseys most part of 

September " 3-7 every clay at Mr Quinceys about the arch." 

October " 27 the Sab Hugh Addams preached at Monotoquod the 
first sermon in the new meeting house." 

November. Notes that on the 6th Mr. Stodard was ordained at 
Chelmsford ; on the 20th, Mr. Loring at Sudbury : " Mr Sherman being 
by the sentence of Councill seperated from his office for high misde- 
meanours." On the 21st John Appleton, Esq., arrived from Canada, 
bringing with him fifty-seven Indian captives, " chief of whom was Mr 
John Williams pastor of Deerfield." 

1707. January. Notes the death of Samuel Legg, Esq., on the 7th, 
and of James Bayley, Esq., professor of medicine, on the 17th. 

February. Notes that " on the 9 th of this month being the Lords 
day in the morning we had an unusuall storm of wind and rain accom- 
panyed with darkness and much thunder and lightening which was the 
more remarkable because of the time of year ; in this storm a barn at 
Scituate belonging to one Thomas Lappam was burnt by lightening and 
24 head of cattle in it. a very awful providence." 

March. " 3 town meeting to choos town officers, weather very cold : 
I agreed to serve in the office of a constable for Nath 1 Spear for three 
pounds money." 

" 31 at home Gathering stones out of the lott and so this cool windy 

1884.] john Marshall's diary. 150 

month of March is marched away. And indeed it was right march 
many weathers : sometime cold : then hot, then cold, then wet, then 
dry : it was a time of genral health." 

" Our Genral Court sat a considerable part of the month, the most 
they did was to conclude about a descent on poor Port royal : what it 
will come to time will evidence : people weer genrally dissatisfyed at 
the first discours of it. Insomuch that thos deputies of the Genrall 
Court who weer known to vote for it weer allmost all left out the next 
choice, from whence arose more of inconvenience then is easy to be 

April. " 7 a training at Weymouth and men pressed to go to Port 

Notes the death, on the 21st, of the Rev. Samuel Torrey of "Weymouth. 

July. "This month of July hath been the most of it good and 
seasonable weather. I heard of no great matter of publick concern 
only our army being at Casco mutinous and disorderly his excellency 
and council sent Elisha Hutchinson Esq. Pen Townsend Esq. and John 
Leverett Esq. to them to quell them, and go as a Councill of War to 
Port royal. After the army had lay there 6 weeks they set saill againe 
for Port Royall where being arived they did nothing worth remember- 
ing. Where the fault lay, whether in officers or souldiers, or both, is 
not my buisness to enquire. I shall only remark that the disappoint- 
ment of that design speaks much of divine anger of which we are 
generally too insensible." 

September. Notes that Nathaniel Pitcher was on the 24th ordained 
at Scituate. 

December. " And as to the year past it may be noted that it was a 
year of Genral health so far as ever I understood. We made a descent 
on Port Royal in the Spring of the year but it came to nothing save 
only that it drained the inhabitants of this province of 22000 pouuds 
and more of their money. We lost of lives in that expedition about 
30 : the summer proved very dry, so that water was as scarce for man 
and beast I suppose as hath been known in New P^ngland. Yet never- 
theless we had a comfortable supply of English corn and grass. And as 
to the Indian crop, although it was ripe more early than usuall yet it 
was more plentyous than usuall, and as for apples and Cyder, we had 
a large supply." 

1708. February " 26 at home ill part of the day at night before Mr 
Quinzey x with liar [erased] Webb. 3 befor Mr Quinzey — John 

May "10. a town meeting to choos a deputy, a sorry fellow 
chosen." 2 

1 Judge Edmund Quincy, a magistrate. 

2 John Webb was delegate from Braintree in 1708. 


May 27. "I went to Boston caryed the information against the 

Notes that he " did not hear of any considerable matter of publiek 
concern : only on the Sabbath day May 23 at Middletown in Connecti- 
cut a thunder storm arose : and blew down part of an house which came 
against the meeting house broke a part of the meeting house, hurt the 
minister and divers of the assembly, on the 19 of May was ordained 
Mr Ruggles of Billrica." 

June "3a very weet day much thunder and lightening one man 
killed. I went to Boston about the information." 

July " 29 [Thursday] The church spent in prayer Mr Fiske being 
very sick." 

December. Notes the death of Deacon William Avery of Dedham 
" about the middle " of the month, and of Samuel Clap of Dorchester ; 
also of the Rev. John Higginson of Salem in his ninety-third year, " a 
man of God and a Good man and just full of faith and of the holy 
Ghost." The summer of 1708 was very dry, " both man and beast was 
sorely distressed for water, so that Grass and Grain was sorely pinched, 
and the crops very small." An Indian assault was made on Haverhill 
in August, and some nineteen persons killed, including Mr. Benjamin 
Rolfe, the pastor of the church. 

1709. January. Notes the death, on the 5th, of Joseph Bridgham, 
" one of the ruling elders in the old church in Boston." 

May. " 6 pressed men forenoon." 

Notes that " the cheif matter of remark of this time was the forming 
of an expedition against Canada, for about the tenth of this month a 
genrall Impress for souldiers for her majesties service ran through this 
province. Some say every tenth man was taken to serve in this 

June " 6. I pressed James Puffer and Jabez." 

July " 10 the Sabbath Mr Marsh a Bridegroom." 

August, "we had our army in pay all this month nothing done by 
them only eat and drink and run the country in debt." 

September. " this month past hath been pretty cool and dry : a 
costly month by reason of an idle armie : no news of any vallue. God 
is pleased to continue to us the enjoyment of his slighted and abused 
Gospell and we have beattle in our borders among all the things that 
minster sorow to us." 

" Toward the end of this month a woman at Boston, a person of a bad 
report, either drowned herself or was carried away by the devil, her 
maiden name was Joan Heiferman." 

1710. February. Notes the death, on the 28th, of Mr. John Rogers 
of Weymouth, and remarks " the month ends well with them that are in 
health and have store of money." 

1881.] john Marshall's diary. 1G1 

March. "13-14 each day at Mr Quinzeys mill dam. 15 at Mr 
Quinzeys dam. 29-30 both days very cold I wrought at Mr Quinzeys 

June. Notes the death of Colonel Winthrop Hilton of Exeter, and 
several others, killed by Indians. 

August. "7a Genral muster of our regiment at Weymouth in order 
to expedition. I was drawn off and impressed. 

" 8-9. weeridle days seeking to hire a man. 10. a day of Genrall 
thanksgiving for plentifull rain. 

" 11-12. about getting a man, at last I got Clement Cook for 12 
pound but he was not acepted. So we got Nat 11 Owen. 

" 24. a Genral muster of the army. I lost good part of the day. 

"31. another genrall muster. 

" This month I was impressed to go forth in her majesties service, 
my circumstances not allowing me to go out myself. I therefore hired 
Nathaneel Owen in my room who was well accepted by major Taylor, 
mustermaster. And I paid him ten pounds money. The army went 
to Port Royal and did good service before they came home againe." 

September " 28 a day of publick fasting and prayer on account of 
Port Royall affair." 

November. "91 came home from Gulivers : mother being dead. 

" 10. went to Boston for things for the funerall, a sore journey. 

"11. attended the funerall. 

"16. a Day of thanksgiving through thees 2 provinces on account 
of success at Port Royall." 

1711. January. "15 Mr Quinseys Barn Burnt this day about 2 
o clock P. M." 

Notes that the loss through the burning of Mr. Quincy's barn 
" modestly computed amounted to litel less than 300 pounds." 

February. Notes the death " about the middle of the month " 
of " Collonell John Foster Esq and of the Reverend Mr. Jonathan 
Russell pastor of the church of Christ in Barnstable." 

The diary ends with the month of February, 1711, and the 
remaining pages in the book, some forty in number, are par- 
tially filled with memoranda of little public interest. In 
January, February, March, and April, 1689, a military watch 
seems to have been kept in Braintree, consisting of a non- 
commissioned officer and six men from Captain Savage's com- 
pany. Marshall was clerk of the company, and noted the 

"18 Aprill hapned the Revolution, which put an end to this kind of 
watch, and then the comitee of malitia ordered the 4 center companys 



in the towne to keep their corps of gaurd at the towne house. By the 
number of twelve men a night and a corporall, and 12 d for the watch to 

" We then took the watch October 29 and then watched Nicolas Sham, 
Steven Cleford, James Burgis, Nicolas Haill, Benj. Threenedles, Mr 
Doubleday, Antony Checkly, Thomas Chrisler, Willyam Boatswain, 
Nath 11 Coffin, Sam 1 Mear, Thomas Watkins." 

The names of the watches for each night are then given until No- 
vember 22 ; the following note then appears : " in going over the 
watch the 2 last times they had spent on them in drink 12 d a night 10 s. 
and in candles 2 s. 6 d." 

" in the Beginning of december the malitia alltered the watch to 7 
men a night and 6 d. to drinke." 

December 23 " Delinquents this watch 7 sick : 5 from home 9 Re- 
fused. I spent on the watch in drink 5 shill in candles 2 shill." , 

"January 1 st ordered that 13 men watch a night. I took the watch 
January 13 168^." 

Then follow again the names of the men constituting the several 

"17 this watch I spent in candles Is. 6 d. in drinks 5 s." 

] 690. " Our company wrought at the fortifications 4 days the 1 
week in Aprill and what mony was taken of any that did not worke was 
spent on them that did : and made a returne to the Capt. of them that 
did nothing : 

"March 30, 1690: it was then ordered by the malitia that a military 
watch be kept in this towne of half a company a night, our company 
watched the 6 and 7 of Aprill. in the 2 nights we spent in drink 6 s. 
4 d. in candles 8 d. one shilling taken between father and self. 

20 and 21 Aprill our company watched I took then of persons that 
did not watch 1 1 shill thus disposed of 

4 persons I hired 

5 shill spent on the 2 guards 
1 shill candles 

one to myself 

" 8 and 9 of May we watched and both nights we spent on the watch 
in bread and drink 5 shill, candles 1 s 

" I had a warrant from the Capt to make distraint on them that did 
not watch which I did accordingly and made returne to the captaine." 

Received 1690 

" March 27 of John Meriday for not traininge 4 shill of which I gave 
account to the capt 


" Our company watched May 24 and 25 at night and we took then in 
raony of tbe companys 7 shillings 6 of which was spent and one to 

" Our company watched June 9 and 10, 1690, and by reason of the 
small pox in the towne and many familys in our company being sick we 
had but small gaurds. I received in mony of the company of sevrall 
persons 10 shillings." 

1690. " October 7 th I was by the advice of serjeant Hawkins, Ser- 
jeant Hunt and the former clerk: Daniell Fairfield, suspended by the 
Leif tenant Willyam Gibson from any farther care of the watch till 
the Capt. Savage came home and the trust of that afaire reposed in 
the former clerk according to his owne desire 

Jon Marshall. 

I liveing out of the towne deserted the companys service Sept 14, 
1691, being a day of training the capt released me from my charge as 
clerk nominated Mr. Fowle to serve the company acepted him for the 
place he allso acepted it. Glad was I, as atests 

John Marshall. 


Spent in cand 





in drink the 2 





to father one i 





Bought of John Dean of Taunton a cow : 

a 3 pound 




driveing and killing 




fore quarter 

74 pound 

fore qr 


hind qr 


hind qr 



54: lb 

head and tong : 

2 s. 

belly feet and hart 

2 s. 

Then follow five pages filled with deaths of persons, young 
and old, whether living in Braintree or elsewhere. Among 
those named is the Rev. Samuel Willard, whom the writer 


refers to at length as "a person of excelent accomplishments 
natural and acquired : an hard student, a powerful preacher of 
the word of God, an exemplary christian : a mirror of all that 
is good." Then follow the Rev. James Allen, Sept. 22, 1710; 
Mrs. Mary Baxter, wife of the Rev. Mr. Joseph Baxter, " after 
a long and sore sickness," March 29, 1711 ; and " Mrs. Helen 
French, the mother of Willyam Veesie : and daughter of the 
Rev d Mr William Thompson, deceased, dyed April 23 : aged 
85 years 1711 : an aged saint." 

Dr. Everett called the attention of the Society to the 
notes on pp. 162, 163, of Mr. Peter Orlando Hutchinson's 
edition of Governor Hutchinson's Diary. They contain ex- 
tracts from a correspondence with members of the Society, 
relative to the printing of a portion of the Diary obtained 
by the late Treasurer from the Hon. George Bancroft, and ulti- 
mately from Mr. Everett, the late United States Minister to 
England. Mr. Peter Orlando Hutchinson intimates that legiti- 
mate access to the Diary could not have been had, and calls upon 
Mr. Everett, Mr. Rives, and Mr. Bancroft to explain their 
action. Dr. Everett commented somewhat on the ignorance 
of the lives and character of public men in America displayed 
in such a charge of surreptitious use of Governor Hutchin- 
son's Diary, and read extracts from Mr. Edward Everett's 
journal and correspondence which show that the Diary was 
placed in his hands by the Rev. John Hutchinson, whom he 
met on a visit to Trentham, the seat of the late Duke of 
Sutherland. The extracts are as follows : — 

[From Mr. Everett's Diary.] 

Saturday, 7th Jan., 1843. At dinner we had Rev. Mr. Hutchinson, 
grandson of the Governor. He has a journal of his grandfather's, 
kept from the time he landed here on his return from America till his 
death ; also a journal by Judge Oliver. The Judge says that Franklin 
in his youth was called a " printer's devil," but he rather thinks it 
should be the " devil's printer." Mr. Hutchinson promises to lend me 
the Governor's journal. 

Sunday, 8th Jan., 1843. Mr. John Hutchinson sent me this morning 
the promised portion of his grandfather's Journal. It contains some 
very curious anecdotes. He gives unequivocally to Samuel Adams the 
credit of being the first to suggest the idea of Independence, and this 
in a conference with George III., the day after his arrival in London. 


[From Mr. Everett's Letter-Book, copied by himself.] 

To Mrs. Everett. 

Trentham, 8th Jan., 1843. 
My dear Wife, — . . . Who should we have at dinner but Rev. Mr. 
Hutchinson, curate of this parish, grandson of my celebrated predeces- 
sor, Gov. Hutchinson, of Massachusetts, the last civil governor of our 
beloved native State before the Revolution ? He has sent me to-day to 
read a part of his grandfather's private journal, which has never seen 
the light. This interests me very much. Unluckily there are but 
twenty-four hours in the day. I shall try to get leave to take it up to 
town with me. 

To Rev. John Hutchinson. 

Rev. John Hutchinson, Blurton Parsonage, near Trentham, thank- 
ing him for lending me the journal of his grandfather, Governor 

[Copies of letters in Mr. Everett's possession, endorsed with the names of the 


John Hutchinson, Jan. 7, 1843. 

Blurton Parsonage, Saturday Night. 
Dear Sir, — I have much pleasure in submitting to your patience 
twenty-two pages of manuscript — if you should be pleased to consider 
it any gratification to read them. I have ever felt that at all times — 
even in those of deadliest antipathy to the principles of my family — 
the Massachusetts have been inclined to do great justice to the character 
and feelings (the latter to the last dedicate, in spite of execrable treat- 
ment, to his native soil) of my ancestor ; and therefore am proud to 
forward for your perusal the enclosed, and have the honor to be, 
dear sir, 

Yours very faithfully, 

John Hutchinson. 

John Hutchinson, Jan. 12, 1843. 

Dear Sir, — I am favored with your communication from Al thorp, 
and, to prevent all risk to the manuscript, would suggest that my cousin 
and brother-in-law, the Rev. W. Hutchinson, of Rotherhithe, should wait 
upon you for it, on your return to town. It can then come to me in 
the course of frequent communication from London. 
I have the honor to remain, dear sir, 

Yours very faithfully, 

John Hutchinson. 

Trentham, Jan. 12. 


[Extract from a letter of the Hon. George Bancroft.] 

Boston, March 1, 1843. 
My dear Sir, — The extract from Hutchinson's Diary was of the 
highest interest; it gives a peep into the thoughts of George III. him- 
self; and for that reason I shall so value the correspondence with Lord 
North ! 

Faithfully, your obliged 

George Bancroft. 

Mr. Everett was at this time gathering materials for Mr. 
Bancroft's discreet use from all quarters ; they were most 
freely accorded by their owners, and were usually copied by 
Mr. Francis R. Rives, Secretary of Legation, and attested by 
Mr. Everett. 

Dr. Everett stated that nothing appeared as to the use Mr. 
Bancroft was at liberty to make of the Diary ; but it had been 
cordially placed in Mr. Everett's hands by Mr. Hutchinson, — 
a thing which Mr. P. O. Hutchinson had apparently looked 
upon as impossible. 

Mr. Deane then said : — 

I have recently had some correspondence with Mr. Bancroft 
on this ver} r subject, he having read the notes referred to in 
Mr. Peter Orlando Hutchinson's new volume. It is sufficiently 
evident now, from the papers which have been laid before the 
Society, that the transcript of Governor Hutchinson's " Con- 
versation" with the king, the origin of which has been 
hitherto unexplained, was made by Mr. Rives for Mr. Bancroft 
in 1843, when the first volume of the Diary containing it was 
lent to Mr. Everett by the Rev. John Hutchinson, the grand- 
son of the Governor. Mr. Peter O. Hutchinson belongs to a 
later generation, and neither he nor the members of his family 
contemporary with him — his cousins — had any knowledge of 
this fact ; and he has too hastily concluded that the Diary had 
been obtained by improper means. 

Our earliest knowledge of the existence in manuscript of 
the account of this celebrated conversation is the mention of 
it in the preface, by the Rev. John Hutchinson, to the third 
volume of the Governor's History, published in 1828. He 
there speaks of it as a part of the material of a biographical 


volume preparing for publication by another member of the 
family, — the more direct inheritor of the Governor's manu- 
scripts. This promised volume failed to appear, and only 
now, after fifty-six years have past, has the engagement been 
partially fulfilled by another hand, and the first instalment of 
the Diary and Letters of the Governor given to the world. 

In the mean time some curiosity was felt as to what took 
place at the alleged interview between the king and Governor 
Hutchinson, who was so summarily ushered into the royal pres- 
ence on his arrival in England; and it was most natural that 
writers on the history of the Revolution should seek to pene- 
trate its secrets. Mr. Bancroft's success in procuring unpub- 
lished material in England for his fascinating volumes is well 
known, and he appears to have been equally successful here. 
The earliest evidence I have met with that he had procured 
access to Governor Hutchinson's Diary was given in the 
seventh volume of his History of the United States, published 
in 1858, though no intimation is there afforded as to the 
source whence the facts narrated were obtained. 1 A few 
years later (in 1865) Mr. Frothingham published his Life of 
Warren ; and here we have the full particulars of the interview 
with the king, and large extracts from the " Conversation," 
covering some three pages of the volume, and credit given to 
Mr. Bancroft for the use of the extracts from the Journal of 
Governor Hutchinson. 2 

Six years later, at a social meeting of this Society, held at 
the house of Mr. Mason on the evening of March 23, 1871, 
Mr. Frothingham produced a full copy of the " Conversation," 
made by him from an earlier transcript in possession of Mr. 
Bancroft, and read it to the meeting, saying that he had been 
enjoined against the printing of it. And at a stated meeting of 
the Society in October, 1877, the manuscript was communi- 
cated for publication, and it was printed in the Proceedings 
under that date. 

After this document had been put in type by the printer, a 
galley-proof of it was sent over to Mr. Peter O. Hutchinson, 

1 See Bancroft, vol. vii. pp. 71, 72. 

2 "I am indebted," says Mr. Frothingham, "to George Bancroft for the use 
of the ' Extracts from the Journal of Thomas Hutchinson, Governor of Massa- 
chusetts.' This manuscript has the following: ' Copied from the original by Mr. 
Rives. — Edward Everett, London, Feb. 1, 1843.'" — Life of Warren, pp. 328-331. 


— who had just then rendered the Society great service by 
enabling it to supply the deficiencies in the Society's copy 
of Hubbard's History of New England, — with a request that 
he would compare it with the original manuscript in his keep- 
ing, and correct any error which he might find. This was 
declined by Mr. Hutchinson for the reason given in his letter 
to myself and to Dr. Oliver, referred to in the notes to his re- 
cently issued volume, of which mention has now been made. 

Messrs. Hill and McKenzie were appointed on the Commit- 
tee to publish the Proceedings, with the Recording Secretary, 
chairman of the Committee. 

The business of the Annual Meeting was then taken up. 
The report of the Council was prepared and read by Mr. 
Haynes ; that of the Librarian, the Cabinet-keeper, and the 
Treasurer followed, — the latter, including the statement of 
the Auditing Committee, being in print. These reports were 
accepted, and are here given. 

Report of the Council. 

The reports of the various officers of the Society to-day 
submitted show that the past year, although comparatively an 
uneventful one in its history, nevertheless exhibits no falling 
off in the elements of substantial growth and prosperity. We 
have been called upon to mourn the loss by death of three 
from our number: Mr. Williams Latham, of Bridgewater, a 
learned and painstaking antiquary ; the Rev. William S. Bart- 
let, the faithful delineator of the life of toil and self-sacrifice of 
a frontier missionary ; and our late Recording Secretary, Mr. 
George Dexter, whose memory will never cease to be cher- 
ished by us for his endearing personal qualities, and to whom 
the Society owes a great debt of gratitude for many years of 
faithful and laborious service. Our esteemed associate, the 
Rev. George W. Blagden, having removed his residence to the 
city of New York, has been transferred from the roll of Resi- 
dent to that of Corresponding Members. Of our Honorary 
Members three have died during the past year : M. Laboulaye, 
the eminent publicist, foremost of our faithful friends in 
France in the hour of our great need ; and the distinguished 
historians, M. Henri Martin and M. Francois A. M. Mignet. 
Two also of our Corresponding Members have passed away : 


the Hon. Gustavus V. Fox, who had but just been transferred 
from our list of Resident Members ; and Dr. Alfred Langdon- 
Elwyn, of Philadelphia. 

At the last Annual Meeting two vacancies were reported as 
existing in our list of Resident Members. To fill these and 
to make good the losses sustained during the past year, the 
Society has elected to membership, General Francis A. Walker, 
President of the Institute of Technology; Professor Arthur L. 
Pern', of Williams College ; the Hon. John E. Sanford, of 
Taunton, and Messrs. Uriel H. Crocker, Martin Brimmer, and 
Roger Wolcott, of Boston, — so that our number is again 
complete. General George W. Cullum, of New York, has 
been elected a Corresponding Member. 

During the past year, under the supervision of the recently 
appointed Committee of Publication, consisting of the Record- 
ing Secretary and Messrs. Hill and McKenzie, the twentieth 
volume of the Proceedings of the Society has been published, 
which closes the First Series. 

As a corporate body we have borne a part in the almost 
universal commemoration of the four hundredth anniversary 
of the birthday of Martin Luther, on which occasion we lis- 
tened to a profoundly philosophical address, set of! by every 
literary merit and grace of delivery, from our former associate 
the Rev. Frederic H. Hedge, the Nestor of American students 
of the literature of Germany. 

Although we cannot claim the year that has passed as 
one unusually fruitful in literary production on the part of 
our own members, still their pens and tongues have by no 
means been idle. In both ways Mr. Charles Francis Adams, 
Jr., has done useful service. In his edition of Morton's "New 
English Canaan," prepared for the Prince Society, with its 
capital memoir of the hero of Merry-Mount and its masterly 
rehabilitation of the faded figure of Sir Christopher Gardiner, 
he has exhibited a pattern of skilful editing ; while his " Col- 
lege Fetich " has ventilated the somewhat stagnant air of 
college halls with a fresh and invigorating blast. Mr. Henry 
Cabot Lodge has given to the world a biography of Daniel 
Webster, which has accomplished the almost impossible task 
of pleasing his friends and satisfying his critics. Dr. Green 
has published several learned chapters on the history of his 
native town, of which " Groton in the Indian Wars " is 



perhaps the most important. Colonel T. W. Higginson has 
continued in " Harper's Magazine " his series of valuable arti- 
cles on American history, which have contributed so much for 
the popular enlightenment as well as entertainment. Judge 
Chamberlain . has delivered before the Webster Historical 
Society an address on " John Adams, the Statesman of the 
American Revolution," in which he has traced the secret 
springs of that great movement with a depth of philosophical 
insight superior to any previous treatment of the subject. The 
Rev. James Freeman Clarke has given to the world Part II. 
of his monumental study upon the " Ten Great Religions," 
and his " Ideas of the Apostle Paul," as well as preserved for 
posterity his recollections of "Anti-Slavery Days." Dr. Pea- 
body has published a delightful translation of that perennially 
fresh and useful work, Cicero's treatise "On Duties," which 
has at last been put into a worthy English garb. Admiral 
Preble has published a most timely and useful " History of 
Steam Navigation," and has also contributed to the " United 
Service Magazine " a series of valuable papers upon " Ships 
and Shipping," which it is to be hoped may eventually be 
expanded into a volume. General Walker has done yeoman 
service to the cause of truth in economical science by the 
publication of his " Political Economy," in the series entitled 
"American Political Science," and by his "Land and Rent " 
has done much to stem the rising flood of socialistic dogmas. 
The Rev. Phillips Brooks has added to his welcome volumes 
the "Sermons Preached in English Churches." Messrs. Whit- 
more and Appleton, the Record Commissioners, have put forth 
another of their important publications, making their Ninth 
Report, comprising all the recorded early Births and Baptisms 
in this city ; and, finally, Mr. Harris has preserved by the 
press the epitaphs to be found in the old burying-ground at 
Block Island, Rhode Island. 

As- we may claim some slight share in the literary produc- 
tions of our Honorary and Corresponding Members, I shall be 
pardoned a brief allusion to some of their works which have 
appeared in the past year. The fifth and sixth volumes of 
what bids fair to be regarded as the standard history of the 
War of the Rebellion have been completed by the Comte cle 
Paris ; and Professor Seeley has published his " Expansion of 
England," a work well worthy of taking its place by the side of 


"The Making of England," of our late Corresponding Member, 
John Richard Green. Our distinguished Honorary Member, 
Mr. George Bancroft, has given to the world several volumes 
of the final and standard revision of his great History. 

While thus gratefully acknowledging the merit of the liter- 
ary work that has been accomplished during the past year by 
our different members, the Executive Committee cannot help 
regretting that a larger proportion of all this skill and labor has 
not been bestowed upon our own publications. But when we 
call to mind the fact that no less than five different committees 
at the present moment have in hand volumes for the Series of 
our Collections, we feel warranted in indulging the hope that 
the year to come will witness a notable addition to them. We 
believe that nothing would so much conduce to the Society's 
welfare as to have more members like our late lamented Re- 
cording Secretary, who would be both able and willing to 
spend their time here in the midst of our wealth of books and 
manuscripts, laboring for its benefit. 

We have had the pleasure during the past year of welcoming 
to our meetings and of listening to the voices of several of our 
Corresponding Members, — among them, Professor James 
Bryce, M.P., the learned historian of "The Holy Roman 
Empire"; and Dr. George H. Moore, the accomplished head 
of the noble Lenox Library at New York. 

In concluding, the Executive Committee congratulate the 
Society on the possession of a membership full and vigorous, 
from whom valuable results in the future may well be expected, 
and on a financial condition both sound and improving. 

Henry W. Haynes, Chairman. 

Report of the Librarian. 
During the year there have been added to the Library : — 

Books 660 

Pamphlets 2,495 

Unbound volumes of newspapers 10 

Bound volumes of newspapers 3 

Broadsides . 23 

Maps 12 

Volumes of manuscripts 18 

Manuscripts 57 

In all . . . 3,278 


Of the books added, 544 have been given, 102 bought, and 
14 obtained by exchange. Of the pamphlets added, 2,285 
have been given, 188 bought, and 22 have been procured by 

The Library now contains, it is estimated, about 29,000 
volumes ; including files of bound newspapers, bound manu- 
scripts, and the Dowse collection. The number of pamphlets 
is about 64,000. 

During the year several important gifts have been made to 
the Library, which deserve a special notice. Our associate 
member, Leverett • Saltonstall, Esq., has presented a large 
number of early publications, which have been in the posses- 
sion of his family for five or six generations. They comprise 
11 volumes, and 148 pamphlets, some of them printed more 
than two hundred years ago, and most of them before 1700. 
Many of them belonged to his great-great-great-grandfather, 
Nathaniel Saltonstall, and others to his ancestor, Governor 
John Leverett. Scarcely any one of these publications proved 
to be a duplicate ; and taken as a whole the collection forms 
one of the most interesting accessions ever made to the 

Mr. Amos A. Lawrence has continued his gifts of books 
relating to the Civil War, having added 23 volumes and 41 
pamphlets on this subject. 

Miss' Eliza S. Quincy, the daughter of President Quincy, 
bequeathed to the Society a very valuable collection of manu- 
scripts, which was received at the February meeting from the 
hands of her nephew, Josiah P. Quincy, Esq., our associate 
member. An account of this bequest, prepared by Dr. George 
E. Ellis, appears in the Proceedings of that date. 

Mr. Peter C. Brooks has made an important addition to the 
Library, having given 115 books and 5 pamphlets, some of 
which were much needed on our shelves. 

The fund left by the late William Winthrop for binding 
books is now available for that purpose ; and 108 volumes 
have been bound at the charge of this fund. 

There have been bought, with the income of the Savage 
Fund, 79 books and 147 pamphlets. 

During the year there have been taken out 92 volumes and 
25 pamphlets, and all have been returned. It should be borne 
in mind, however, that the Library is used more for reference 


than for circulation ; otherwise the statement of this fact might 
give a wrong impression of its use. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Samuel A. Green, Librarian. 

Boston, April 10, 1884. 

Report of the Cabinet-keeper. 

Since the last Annual Meeting there have been seventy-five 
donations to the Cabinet, these comprising two miniature 
portraits, fifty-four engravings, eight photographs, three helio- 
types, and several articles of a miscellaneous character. 

During the summer, the portraits in the gallery were re- 
arranged, and several of them that needed repair were placed 
in the hands of Mr. Sinclair ; including that of Dr. Clark, 
the Rev. John Rogers, the Rev. John Bailey, the Rev. Joshua 
Gee, Mrs. Gee, Mrs. Mary Smibert, and one whose history is 

It was hoped that another portion of the Catalogue of the 
Cabinet would be forthcoming at this meeting ; but, owing to 
some unlooked-for delay, this was found impracticable. It is 
believed, however, that the entire Catalogue will be completed 
during the coming } r ear. 

Respectfully submitted, 

F. E. Oliver, Cabinet-keeper. 

Report of the Treasurer. 

In compliance with the requirements of the By-laws, Chap- 
ter VII., Article 1, the Treasurer respectfully submits his 
Annual Report, made up to March 31, 1884. 

The special funds held by the Treasurer are nine in number, 
and are as follows : — 

I. The Appleton Fund, which was created Nov. 18, 1854, 
by the gift to the Society, from the executors of the will of the 
late Samuel Appleton, of stocks of the appraised value of ten 
thousand dollars. These stocks were subsequently sold for 
812,203, at which sum the fund now stands. Interest, at the 
rate of six per cent per annum, is computed on that amount, 
and is chargeable on the real estate. The income is applicable 
to "the procuring, preserving, preparation, and publication of 
historical papers." The unexpended balance of income now 


on hand, and the income for the ensuing year will be available 
toward the publication of the Pickering Papers. 

II. The Massachusetts Historical Trust-Fund, which 
now stands, with the accumulated income, at $10,000. This 
fund originated in a gift of two thousand dollars from the late 
Hon. David Sears, presented Oct. 15, 1855, and accepted by 
the Society, Nov. 8, 1855. On Dec. 26, 1866, it was increased 
by a gift of five hundred dollars from Mr. Sears, and another 
of the same amount from our late associate, Mr. Nathaniel 
Thayer. The income must be appropriated in accordance with 
the directions in Mr. Sears's declaration of trust in the printed 
Proceedings for November, 1855. Interest, at the rate of six 
per cent per annum, is chargeable on the real estate of the 
Societ} 7 . The income for the last year has been appropriated 
toward the publication of the Trumbull Papers. 

III. The Dowse Fund, which was given to the Society 
by the executors of the will of the late Thomas Dowse, April 
9, 1857, for the " safe keeping " of the Dowse Library. It 
amounts to $10,000, and is a charge on the real estate. 

IV. The Peabody Fund, which was presented by the late 
George Peabody, in a letter dated Jan. 1, 1867, and now 
amounts to $22,123. It is invested in the seven per cent bonds 
of the Boston and Albany Railroad Co., and a deposit in the 
Suffolk Savings Bank ; and the income is only available for 
the publication and illustration of the Society's Proceedings and 
Memoirs, and for the preservation of the Society's Historical 

V. The Savage Fund, which was a bequest from the late 
Hon. James Savage, received in June, 1873, and now stands 
on the books at the sum of $5,295. It is invested in the bonds 
of the Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Co., 
and in the stock of the Boston Gas-Light Co. The income is 
to be used for the increase of the Society's Library. 

VI. The Erastus B. Bigelow Fund, which was given in 
February, 1881, by Mrs. Helen Bigelow Merriman, in recog- 
nition of her father's interest in the work of the Societ} r . 
The original sum was one thousand dollars; but the interest up 
to this date having been added to the principal, it now stands 
at $1,200.56. There is no restriction as to the use to be made 
of this fund. 

VII. The William Winthrop Fund, which amounts to 


the sum of three thousand dollars, and was received Oct. 13, 
1882, under the will of the late William Winthrop, for many 
years a Corresponding Member of the Society. The income 
is to be applied "to the binding for better preservation of the 
valuable manuscripts and books appertaining to the Society." 

VIII. The Richard Frothingham Fund, which repre- 
sents a gift to the Society, on the 23d of March, 1883, from 
the widow of our late Treasurer, of a certificate of twenty 
shares in the Union Stock Yard and Transit Co., of Chicago, 
and of the stereotype plates of Mr. Frothingham's " Siege of 
Boston," "Life of Joseph Warren," and "Rise of the Repub- 
lic." The fund stands on the Treasurer's books at $3,000. 
There are no restrictions on the uses to which the income 
may be applied. 

IX. The General Fund, which now amounts to $3,550, 
and represents a legacy of two thousand dollars from the late 
Henry Harris, received in July, 1867, a legacy of one thousand 
dollars from the late George Bemis, received in March, 1879, 
three commutation fees of one hundred and fifty dollars each, 
and a gift of one hundred dollars from our late distinguished 
associate, Ralph Waldo Emerson. It is invested in a bond of 
the Quincy and Palmyra Railroad Co., for one thousand dol- 
lars, and a bond of the Hannibal and St. Joseph Railroad Co., 
also for one thousand dollars. Fifteen hundred and fifty 
dollars have been paid from it toward the reduction of the 
mortgage debt; and this sum is an incumbrance on the real 
estate of the Society. 

The following abstracts and the trial balance show the 
present condition of the several accounts : — - 




March 31. To balance on hand $1, 589.44 


March 31. To receipts as follows: — 

General Account 11,077.46 

Income of Peabody Fund 1,470.00 

Income of Savage Fund 350.00 

Income of Kichard Frothingham Fund 150.00 


March 81. To balance brought down $906.10 



March 3L By payments as follows : — 

Reduction of mortgage debt -$7,000.00 

Income of Peabody Fund 1,434.31 

Income of Savage Fund 290.35 

Income of William Winthrop Fund 148.60 

Income of Mass. Hist. Trust-Fund 91.87 

General Account 4,765.67 

By balance on hand » . 906.10 



1884. DEBITS - 

March 31. To sundry payments : — 

J. A. Henshaw, salary $600.00 

J. H. Tuttle, salary 1,149.99 

Interest on mortgage 1,350.00 

Insurance 187.50 

Copying Sewall's Letter Book 121.87 

Printing, stationery, and postage 402.96 

Fuel and light 242.11 

Care of fire, etc 365.41 

Miscellaneous expenses and repairs 345.83 

Income of Appleton Fund 732.18 

Income of Massachusetts Historical Trust-Fund . . 600.00 

Income of Dowse Fund 600.00 

Income of E. B. Bigelow Fund 67.95 

Income of William Winthrop Fund 264.00 

Sinking Fund 2,000.00 

Building account 3,570.91 

To balance to new account 4,751.10 


1883. CREDim 

March 31. By balance on hand $5,674.35 

March 31. By sundry receipts : — 

Rent of Building 9,000.00 

Income of General Fund 160.00 

Interest I 1608 

Income of Dowse Fund 600.00 

Admission Fees 100.00 

Assessments 870.00 

Sales of publications, etc 831.38 


March 31. By balance brought down $4,751.10 


Income of Appleton Fund. 


March 31. By balance brought forward $272.64 

March 31. By one year's interest on $12,203 principal 732.18 


March 31. By amount brought down $1,004.82 

Income of William Winthrop Fund. 



March 31. To amount paid for binding $148.60 

„ balance carried forward 115.40 



March 31. By interest on $3,000 principal $264.00 

March 31. By balance brought down $115.40 

Income of Massachusetts Historical Trust-Fund. 


March 31. To amount paid on account of Trumbull Papers .... $91.87 
„ balance carried forward 666.00 




March 31. By amount brought forward $157.87 

Sept. 1. „ one year's interest on $10,000 principal 600.00 


March 31. By balance brought down $666.00 

Income of Dowse Fund. 

1884. DEBITS. 

March 31. To amount placed to credit of General Account .... $600.00 

1884. CREDITS ' 
March 31. By one year's interest on $10,000 principal $600.00 

' 23 


Income of Peabody Fund. 


March 31. To balance brought forward $28.15 

March 31. To amount paid for printing, binding, preservation of 

historical portraits, etc 1,434.31 

„ balance carried forward 7.54 



March 31. By one year's interest on railroad bonds $1,470.00 

March 31. By balance brought down $7.54 

Income of Savage Fund. 


March 31. To balance brought forward $48.97 


March 31. To amount paid for books . . • 290.35 

„ balance carried forward 10.68 




March 31. By dividends on gas stock $50.00 

„ interest on railroad bonds 300.00 


March 31. By balance brought down $10.68 

Sinking Fund. 


Jan. 17. To amount applied to reduction of mortgage $2,000.00 


Oct. 1. By amount transferred from the General Account .... $2,000.00 



Cash $906.10 

Real Estate 103,280.19 

Investments 50,968.00 




Notes Payable $18,000.00 

Building Account 00,077.19 

Appleton Fund 12,203.00 

Dowse Fund 10,000.00 

Massachusetts Historical Trust-Fund 10,000.00 

Peabody Fund 22,123.00 

Savage Fund 5,295.00 

Erastus B. Bigelow Fund 1,200.50 

William Winthrop Fund 3,000.00 

Richard Frothingham Fund 3,000.00 

General Fund . 3,550.00 

Income of Massachusetts Historical Trust-Fund 660.00 

Income of Appleton Fund 1,004.82 

Income of Savage Fund 10.68 

Income of Peabody Fund 7.54 

Income of William Winthrop Fund 115.40 

Income of Richard Frothingham Fund 150.00 

General Account 4,751.10 


The real estate is subject to the following incumbrances, — 
the balance of the mortgage note ($18,000), the principal of 
the Appleton Fund ($12,203), of the Massachusetts Histori- 
cal Trust-Fund ($10,000), of the Dowse Fund ($10,000), of 
the Erastus B. Bigelow Fund ($1,200.56), and of the William 
Winthrop Fund ($3,000) and a part of the principal of the 
General Fund ($1,550), making in the aggregate, $55,953.56, 
against $62,885.61 last year. 

Charles C. Smith, 


Boston, March 31, 1884. 

Report of the Auditing Committee. 

The undersigned, one of a Committee appointed to examine 
the accounts of the Treasurer of the Massachusetts Historical 
Society, as made up to March 31, 1884, has attended to the 
duty, and reports that he finds them correctly kept and 
properly vouched ; that the securities held by the Treasurer 
for the several funds correspond with the statement in his 
Annual Report ; that the balance of cash on hand is satisfac- 
torily accounted for ; and that the Trial Balance is accurately 
taken from the Ledger. 

Abbott Lawrence, Committee. 

Boston, April 7, 1884. 


On motion of Dr. Paige, the thanks of the Society were 
voted to the retiring members of the Council, and to the 
Publishing Committee of the past year. 

Messrs. Chamberlain, Hill, A. B. Ellis, and Bugbee were 
appointed as a new Committee on the Sewall Correspondence. 

The election of officers for the ensuing year then took place ; 
and the following, who had been reported by the Nominating 
Committee, were by ballot unanimously chosen : — 



Rev. GEORGE E. ELLIS, D.D , LL.D Boston. 


Recording Secretary. 
Rev/ EDWARD J. YOUNG, A.M Cambridge. 

Corresponding Secretary. 
JUSTIN WINSOR, A.B Cambridge. 

CHARLES C. SMITH, Esq Boston. 

Hon. SAMUEL A. GREEN, M.D Boston. 


Executive Committee of the Council. 

CHARLES F. ADAMS, Jr., A.B Quincy. 



Hon. SAMUEL C. COBB Boston. 


A new volume of the Proceedings, being the twentieth, was 
laid on the table for members at this meeting. 



The regular meeting was held at the rooms on Thursday, 
the 8th instant, and, in the absence of the President, Dr. 
George E. Ellis took the chair. 

The Recording Secretary read his account of the preceding 

The Corresponding Secretary announced that he had received 
a letter from Mr. Roger Wolcott, accepting his election as a 
Resident Member. 

The Librarian reported the donations to the Library. 

Mr. Amos A. Lawrence offered for the Cabinet a miniature 
portrait of John Brown, and a likeness of Charles Robinson, 
together with a file of Kansas newspapers for the Library, and 
made substantially the following remarks : — 

These daguerreotypes of two remarkable men are presented 
to the Society in the hope that they will be carefully kept, as 
there are no duplicates. They were taken in the height of the 
excitement about Kansas, in 1856, and in what was thought to 
be the final struggle for political supremacy between the free 
and the slave States. Charles Robinson, acting Governor by 
the free choice of the bond-fide settlers, still lives upon the 
land which he passed over many years before the settlement 
of Kansas, when on his way overland to California acting as 
surgeon to a large emigrant party. 

When Eli Thayer obtained the charter of the New England 
Emigrant Aid Society, and began to preach up the Kansas 
ci'usade, the organization was completed here in Boston ; and 
Dr. Robinson, of Fitchburg, was chosen to be the territorial 
agent, Charles H. Branscomb took charge of the emigrant 
parties, and S. C. Pomeroy was financial agent in Kansas. 

The enthusiasm increased ; parties were formed all over the 
Northern States. The Emigrant Aid Company undertook to 
give character and direction to the whole. This society was 
to be loyal to the Government under all circumstances; it was 
to support the party of law and order, and it was to make 
Kansas a free State by bona-fide settlement, if at all. Charles 


Robinson had the requisite qualities to direct this movement. 
He had had great experience in the troubles of settlement in 
California. He was cool, judicious, entirely devoid of fear, and 
in every respect worthy of the confidence reposed in him by 
the settlers and by the society. He was obliged to submit to 
great hardship and injustice, chiefly through the imbecility of 
the United States Government agents. He was imprisoned, 
his house was burnt, and his life Was often threatened. Yet 
he never bore arms, nor omitted to do whatever he considered 
to be his duty. He sternly held the people to their loyalty to 
the Government against the arguments and the example of 
the " higher law" men, who were always armed, who were not 
real settlers, and who were bent on bringing about a Border 
war, which they hoped would extend to the older States. 
This policy of the New England Society, carried out by Rob- 
inson and those in Kansas who acted with him, was finally 
successful and triumphant. David Atchison and his hordes 
retired from the scene ; the few negro slaves who had been 
carried into the Territory disappeared, and now (1884) the 
State contains one million one hundred thousand inhabitants, 
without paupers and without beggars. A whole generation is 
coming up who do not know the taste of ardent spirits. This 
has always been a favorite theory and practice of Robinson ; 
and now they have gone beyond him, and have inserted pro- 
hibition in the State Constitution, and elected their State 
officers on that issue. 

But what shall we say of John Brown, who was another 
representative man ? His course was the opposite of Robin- 
son's. He was always armed ; he was always disloyal to the 
United States Government and to all government, except to 
what he called the " higher law." He was always ready to 
shed blood, and he always did shed it without remorse ; for 
without blood, as he often said, " there can be no remission." 
That he was sincere there can be no doubt ; for he made his 
numerous sons his companions, and endeavored to imbue them 
with his own ideas ; at least four of them were killed with 
arms in their hands. 

In the night of May 23, 1856, Mr. Doyle and his two sons 
were taken from their beds at Pottawatamie, and caused to 
walk one hundred yards from their house, when the father 
was shot dead by Brown, while the sons were stabbed and 


hacked to death with straight navy swords in the hands of his 

Mr. Wilkinson, who was taking care of a sick wife, was 
obliged to leave her and go with the midnight party, who 
brutally murdered him, not so far from his wife but that she 
heard the struggle and the final shot. 

William Sherman was another victim of these midnight assas- 
sins, who were not then known, but who are now known per- 
fectly. The evidence is complete. Professor Spring, of the 
State University of Kansas, is preparing a work upon the early 
history of that State, which will contain the truth, with all the 
proofs, so that hereafter there can be no such statements made 
as have deceived nearly a whole generation. 

It fell to me to give John Brown his first letter to Kansas, 
introducing him to Governor Robinson, and authorizing him 
to employ him and draw on me for his compensation if he 
could make him useful in the work of the Emigrant Aid 
Society. But very soon Governor Robinson wrote that he' 
could not employ him, as he was unreliable, and " would as 
soon shoot a United States officer as a Border ruffian." 

When he was a prisoner at Harper's Ferry, I wrote to 
Governor Wise, advising his release on the ground that he was 
a monomaniac, and that his execution would make him a 
martyr. The answer to this letter was very creditable to 
Governor Wise. Afterwards, when in Washington about the 
Kansas troubles, I spoke of it to Mr. Pierce, the ex-President, 
who was there at the time, and he asked to see it. So I ordered 
it sent to him ; but it was never returned. 

John Brown had no enemies in New England, but many 
friends and admirers. He was constantly receiving money 
from them. They little knew what use he was making of 
it, for he deceived everybody. If he had succeeded in his 
design at Harper's Ferry of exciting a servile insurrection, the 
country would have stood aghast with horror ; his would have 
been anything but a martyr's crown. 

Dr. Ellis exhibited a photograph of the model of the statue 
of John Harvard, which is about to be cast in bronze and set 
up in Cambridge. It represents him as a young man, wearing 
an academic gown and seated in a chair, with his hand ex- 
tended upon an open book, and with a thoughtful, meditative 


expression upon his countenance. Dr. Ellis then spoke as 
follows : — 

It is a satisfaction to know that some university men in our 
mother country are sharing the interest which has long been 
felt by so many of us here to trace the English antecedents of 
the honored man, the scholar and divine whose name is borne 
by Harvard College. Especially is this sympathetic interest 
with us felt at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, John Harvard's 
Alma Mater. In connection with the tercentenary of the foun- 
dation of that college, which is to have observance in the 
next month, there may well be a quickened attention given to 
the subject. Informed as the members of that academic body 
are of the present full and fair development and the signal 
prosperity of our own college, it must be most grateful for them 
to realize that its munificent founder, in the days of our wilder- 
ness straits and poverty, was one of their own alumni. Most 
quietly and unobserved did he slip away from his English 
home, and after less than two years of an invalid life in this 
land of his exile, leave so fruitful and fragrant a memorial of 
himself here. His birthplace, parentage, date of embarkation 
and arrival, are still unknown to us. 

Within a few days I have received a letter from Cambridge, 
England, April 15, from the Rev. Alfred Rose, M. A., who is 
dean, fellow, and bursar of Emmanuel College, and who prefers 
to designate himself by the last of those titles. Accompanying 
his letter he sends me the April number of the " Genealogist," 
an English quarterly magazine. In this is an article entitled 
" Harvard University, United States, and the Harvards of 
South wark," by W. Rendle, F. R. C. S. It opens as follows : — 

" I wish we could be more absolutely sure of the identity of the more 
or less unconscious founder of the great Harvard University. But 
whether so or no, he certainly deserves more notice than he has had, as 
out of his comparatively humble bequest has come this — one of the 
noblest features of the United States of America." 

Dr. Rendle then presents, chiefly from our own authorities, 
such scant information as we have of Harvard, in connection 
with the founding of our college, estimating the present pecu- 
niary value of his bequest at five thousand pounds sterling. 
Referring to the occasion of the first emigration of the Pilgrims 


to Plymouth, "to escape the harassing treatment dealt out to 
Puritanical people," and regarding Harvard as in sympathy 
with them, he proceeds as follows : — 

61 Growing out of this condition of things, I have a very interesting 
story to tell ; and although it may in some particulars lack exact demon- 
stration, the facts are as I give them, and the probability that they fill 
up the narrative, or nearly so, is clear to me. Very much of this perse- 
cuting trouble occurred in the borough of Southwark, and here, I have 
no doubt, John Harvard was born ; here, also, as far as can be made 
out, his friends and connections were, and on the objectionable. side. I 
note in the warden's papers, vestry registers, and other books of St. 
Saviour's, many Harvards, Harverds, and Harvyes, appearing, with 
little interruption, for many years, and implying the same persons. The 
names taken from these sources follow. In some manuscripts and illus- 
trative volumes relating to St. Saviour's — left to the British Museum 
by the late chaplain, Samuel Benson — he states that he cannot find the 
name of John Harvard, the founder ; but that he had no doubt he was 
born of this family of Harvard of St. Saviour's about 1610, probably a 
short time before. After careful, I will not say exhaustive, examina- 
tion of the original books and papers, I am quite of the same opinion." 

Dr. Rendle then gives a list of several entries in the docu- 
ments referred to, of Harvards, Harverds, and Harvyes, of St. 
Saviour's, Southwark, all of the same family connection, be- 
tween the dates of 1582 and 1625. Though some of these are 
entered as butchers, Dr. Rendle observes, u they all appear to 
be people of means and position," — vestrymen, church wardens, 
one a governor of Queen Elizabeth's Grammar School, and 
some assessed to the provost-marshal tax among the chief 
people. No John Harvard is on the list. Puritan people 
gathered much from about 1600 in private and obscure houses 
in this borough, and from it went forth many to New England. 
Among these, possibly, was John Harvard. 

The Rev. Bursar Rose, in his letter to me, commenting on 
Dr. Rendle's article, sent to him with the caution, " I pray you, 
do not expect too much ; it is partly tentative, and to elicit 
more," adds the following very important information, which 
is new to us : — 

" There is a material point in our abstract of college entries of which, 
I believe, Dr. Rendle was not aware. It is that there appear to be 
really two entries referring to John Harvard. First — ' 1627 : 10br., 19. 



Harvard, Jno. P. [Pensioner], Middx., A. M. 1635/ Second — < 1628, 
Apr. 17. Harvard, Jno. P. A. M., 1635.' It would appear that 
the entry is thus repeated, perhaps because there was some delay in 
Harvard's actually coming into residence. The first to be observed 
is the Middx., i. e. Middlesex, which assigns that as Harvard's county. 
The entry of the county is very frequent, though not by any means uni- 
versal at that time in our register. I believe Dr. Rendle is not aware 
of this point of Middlesex. It may be that John Harvard's father had 
left the Southwark colony of Harvards, and crossed the river and settled 
in Middlesex, — the part of London, as you know, north of the Thames. 
If this was the case, I fear the Great Fire of London must have swept 
away the parish registers which might contain the records of births, etc., 
we should so much like to find." 

So far only has research reached. Zealous inquirers will 
pursue it, and we wait hopefully the results. 

Mr. Quincy then said : — 

I have brought with me an old deed which I recently dis- 
covered among some papers in my attic, and which I will 
present to the Society 'as having a certain interest from its 
autographs. It is the conveyance of Mrs. Ann Hibbins, who 
was executed for witchcraft June 19, 1656. The genius of 
Hawthorne, as well as her own tragical fate, must always pre- 
serve this lady's name from oblivion. By this instrument she 
conveys to Matthew Coy her " dwelling house near unto the 
spring, and next the house where I now dwell." One of the 
witnesses was the second John Cotton, who was then a boy. 
Pinned to the deed by one of the pins of the period, is a re- 
ceipt by Mrs. Hibbins of part of the purchase-money ; and 
after her death this was proved before her reputed brother, 
Governor Bellingham. The deed itself was proved before 
Governor Endicott, who a few weeks before, in open court, 
had sentenced the grantor to bhe gallows. Following the 
fine gubernatorial autograph oi the magistrate, is that of the 
well-known Secretary Rawson, who attests the registration of 
the deed. The codicil to Mrs. Hibbins's will describes Edward 
Rawson as among her " loving friends," and intrusts her 
chests and desk to his care. He was undoubtedly one of the 
leading citizens who endeavored to save her life. The deed is 
signed by a mark, but, instead of the usual cross, it consists of 


part of the name written with fair distinctness. Temporary 
infirmity may have prevented Mrs. Hibbins from freely using 
her hand. Her high social position, and the unusual capacity 
with which tradition credits her, render it certain that no lack 
of education occasioned the imperfect signature. The docu- 
ment adds nothing to our knowledge of the past ; but the 
names of Bellingham, Endicott, and Rawson — men in differ- 
ent ways so nearly connected with this unfortunate lady — 
set the imagination to work to construct scenes which history 
has suppressed. 

Mr. Deane submitted several papers relating to the hostile 
expeditions of Samuel Argall to the northern part of Virginia 
in 1613, in which the several settlements at Mt. Desert, 
St. Croix, and Port Royal were broken up. After giving a 
brief narrative of this affair, and saying that it had been 
often regarded by historians as a lawless and wholly unauthor- 
ized proceeding, inasmuch as Argall himself was trespassing 
upon territory beyond the chartered limits of the southern 
colony of Virginia, Mr. Deane explained the purport of the 
papers he now communicated, which, by the courtesy of the 
Maine Historical Society, he had been permitted to use. By 
these it appeared that to the remonstrance of the French Gov- 
ernment against the act of Argall, the Virginia Company had 
replied that Argall was authorized and commissioned, under 
the seal of the colony, to do what he had done ; and the Eng- 
lish Government justified the act. 1 

Argall left Virginia on the expedition which resulted in the 
attack on St. Savior, at Mt. Desert, not earlier than June. 2 

The first document read was a letter from H. de Montmo- 
rency, Admiral of France, to King James I., dated Oct. 28, 
1613, N. S.: 3 — 

1 The question as to the justification of Argall in displacing the French at 
this time does not depend on our views as to the rights of rival colonists or of 
the English or the French Government to the territory which each claimed. 
That Argall was acting under a commission and instructions from the Virginia 
Company or Colony, and that their action and his were justified and assumed 
by the English Government, is sufficient to relieve him from the stigma which 
attaches to a pirate or a buccaneer. — C. D. 

2 Purchas, vol. iv. 1764-1765. 

3 See " Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, 1574-1660," p. 15. The 
original letter is in French, and this translation is supplied at the Public Record 
Office. — CD. 


Sire, — I thought it was my duty to accompany the letters which 
the King my master wrote you with some of my own, in order to 
have the honor to offer to your Majesty my very humble service, and 
to entreat you to be favorable, (since, as Admiral under the authority of 
the King, I have the charge of the marine affairs of this Kingdom,) 
that I represent to you the just complaint and the injury which the 
French have received from some of your subjects, who, being in an 
English ship, called the Treasurer, where Samuel d'Argail is captain, 
went to that country of Canada, called New France, to the harbor of 
Pentagoet, where they found a small settlement, which was begun by 
permission of the King with our leave, and the expense of Madame La 
Marquis de Guercheville, lady of honor to the Queen, through a good 
and holy zeal to lead the poor Savages of the said country to a civil 
conversation, and to preach to them the doctrine of Jesus Christ, and 
for that purpose, a number of Jesuit fathers were there. 

But your said subjects have ruined this plan ; they have attacked the 
colony ; they have slain many men, and among others, two of the said 
Jesuits; and besides, they carried away two others with them into Vir- 
ginia, (by what people say) ; and have abandoned the rest of the people 
to the mercy of the waters, in a small skiff. We know well enough, 
Sire, the goodness, and the usual clemency with which you are filled, 
and that you are so far removed from such inhumanity that you will 
assuredly do justice in this matter, when you are informed of it. There- 
fore, in the name of France, and of the private parties interested in 
these countries, I beg your Majesty for three things ; one, that you will 
command the two Jesuit fathers to be returned in Safety with the other 
prisoners ; the other, that restitution shall be made for so remarkable a 
robbery, which costs the said dame Marquise more than a hundred thou- 
sand livres of loss. And the third, that your council or the company of 
Virginia may be obliged to declare and explain as far as where she 
understands to be carried the boundaries and confines of the said coun- 
try of Virginia, inasmuch as we thought the difficulty might have come 
on account of the neighborhood of the two colonies. But your Majesty 
knows that for more than eighty years the French have been in pos- 
session of it, and have given to it the name of New France. The 
hope that your Majesty will be 1 how prudently to remedy this, 

and find it good, if it please you, that Mons. de Buisseaux, Ambassa- 
dor may be interested more particularly with it, to give us an answer 
to it as favorable as the complaint of it is reasonable, and full of jus- 
tice. Nevertheless I pray God, 

1 The word or words here wanting might, if they could be supplied, help to 
bring this sentence into a little better shape. Probably the original letter which 
we have not, or the translation, at this place, is a little obscure. The meaning is 
obvious. — C. D. 


Sire, That he may give your Majesty a very long and very happy 

Your very humble Servant, 

H. de Montmorency. 


ce xxviij of October 1613 

To the King of Great Britain 
Cotemporary ) " A letter from the Admiral of France to his Ma". concerning 

indorsement } Samuel Argall." 

" Concerning ye Depredations committed by ye English upon 
ye French at Canada, and y* it belongs to them." 

This is written tempus Carolus II. by one of Secretary 

Sir Joseph Williamson's clerks. 

The reply of the Virginia Company in defence of Argall 
then followed : 1 — 

... To the substance of the first complaint : That it is true Captain 
Argall did take a French ship within the limits of our colony, who 
went about to plant contrary to the extent and privilege of his Majesty's 

1 I copy these extracts from the " Boston Daily Advertiser " of Aug. 31, 1870. 
The paper was procured in England by the late Dr. Leonard Woods, and was 
read in part at a meeting of the Maine Historical Society at Old York, Maine, 
August 22, by the late Mr. John A. Poor. It had only recently been discovered 
in the Cottonian collection in the British Museum, the original being partly con- 
sumed by fire ; and in printing the portions read several omissions were indi- 
cated by blank spaces. 

In reprinting the extracts I have modernized the spelling, and given the abbre- 
viated words in full. A few obvious clerical errors or printer's errors are corrected 
by me, and a few words are conjecturally added in brackets. In the interesting 
communication made by Mr. Poor on this occasion, he made use of several other 
papers procured by Dr. Woods. These, with Mr. Poor's own remarks, are now 
in the Library of the Maine Historical Society, and have been kindly submitted 
to my inspection and use ; but the Cottonian manuscript seems to have been 
detached from the other papers, and is wanting, and cannot now be found ; and 
my only resource is now to use the print of the " Boston Daily Advertiser," or to 
procure a fresh copy from London. The existence of this paper is to be ex- 
plained by supposing that the English Government, on receiving the remonstrance 
of the French Government, applied to the Council of the Virginia Company in 
England for an explanation, and this is the Company's defence, addressed to their 
own Government. It will be seen that no question here arises as to their right to 
expel intruders from the whole territory embraced in the Virginia patent through 
its whole extent, and such may have been the true interpretation of their rights 
and duties as given in section xii. of the charter of April 10, 1606. (See Stith, 
Appendix, p. 5.) The service here rendered was acknowledged by the Northern 
Company as having been performed by Sir Samuel Argall, who was despatched 
" with commission to displace them [the French], which he performed with much 
discretion, judgment, valor, and dexterity." — Brief Relation, in 2 Mass. Hist. Soc. 
Coll., vol. ix. pp. 1-25. — C. D. 


letters patent to us granted. That he did it by the command of the 
governor of our colony by his commission to him given under the seal 
of the colony, and by virtue of such authority as is to him derived from 
his Majesty's great seal of England. 

That whereas it is said, it was 200 leagues from our plantation, inti- 
mating thereby that it was out of our limits, we say the coast lying 
next E. N. E. and W. S. W. many more hundred leagues will not de- 
liver them without our borders, we having granted unto us from 34 
to 45 degrees of north latitude, and from E. to W. from one sea to 
another, with a certain clause that if any other nations should get land 
to the north of 45 degrees, and by any river or lake, or by land travel 
should come to the southwards, to plant behind our backs, that it should 
be lawful for our governor to resist, displant, and take by force any that 
should make such attempt. 

And we do further avow that the said ship was taken between 43 
and 44 degrees, which in express limitation is within his Majesty's 
grant and is annexed to his royal crown. And that this is proved 
by the several confessions of divers of the French examined by Sir 
Thomas Dale, and certified accordingly unto us by him. And that the 
said Captain Argall, besides his several commissions for his justification 
to us showed, hath farther produced unto [us] a testimonial or certificate 
under the seal of our colony, that he hath in these his voyages no way 
exceeded the commissions to him given . . . that upon the cross- 
examination . . . certified the said ship and other . . . lawful prize 
unto the said colony by . . . Letters Patents, and that therefore we 
suppose be wholly for the fact excusable . . . Concerning the aggrava- 
tion of circumstances we . . . Argall has not above 60 men in his 
ship. That the first shot at him ; and that all the victuals, 

munition, utensils for plantation besides the ship and her app . . . 
which was re-delivered at the request of the French A . . . was not 
to the value of £200 sterling, as we are [can ?] prove by the several 
inventories delivered by the Ffrench to] the Marshal of Virginia, and 
together with their [examinations] unto us certified. 

Secondly, to the imputation of inhumanity used by him [to his] 
prisoners, we say it is wholly* false. That neither Monsieur Taussy x 
nor any other were detained as prisoners, but that he went and returned 
from ship to shore at pleasure. That Captain Argall did propound to 
them three offers, — 

1. First, to give them a small pinnace, with sufficient victuals [to] 
carry them all into France. 

2. Secondly, to give them passage from thence to the bank, 120 
leagues from Cape Brittayne, there to meet . . . French shipping. 

1 Saussaye, the captain of the French ship captured by Argall. — C. D. 


3. Thirdly, to give Monsieur Taussy, their captain, a shallop, and as 
[many] of his men as he would choose, with sulficient provision to 
their own wage, and to carry the residue . . . into Virginia . . . but 
condition was chosen by the captain, and accordingly performed. These 
offers are proved by the confession of Monsieur Taussy, his two Jesuits, 
the Master, and at least ten other of the company, which are ready to 
be shown, with many attestations of great humanity and . . . cour- 
tesy showed to them . . . 

And that these our reasonable answers considered, the King of France 
is neither in his Horns' [honor?] nor title any way injured by the just 
defence of our own, and maintenance of those limits and extent of 
territory given unto us by his Majesty's Letters Patents many years be- 
fore the French had any footing to the south of Canada. 

Neither hath Madame de Guercheville any reason to expect repara- 
tion having entered without our leave, within our limits and dominion, 
by force to plant or trade, contrary to the good correspondence and 
league of these two most royal kings. And that if any particular be 
hereof doubted or replied unto, we will be ready to give testimony and 
further answer thereunto. 

In addition to the claim presented by Admiral Montmo- 
rency for reparation for the injuries done by Argall, another 
protest and claim appear to have been presented by Sieur de 
Buisseaux, resident minister of the French King to the English 
Court. These appear by the reply to that official by the Eng- 
lish minister, said to have been copied by Mr. Sainsbury from 
the British State papers, in the French language ; but an Eng- 
lish version only is found among the papers here submitted, 
perhaps not entire. This paper is of considerable length, but 
those portions only which relate to the subject now in hand 
are here presented. A copy of the letter will be filed in the 
archives of the Society. It is entitled, — 

p R " Reply to the complaints presented to the King by the 

state Papers, Sieur de Bisseaux, resident Ambassador to the King, from 

France, 1614. , -. , , ' „ ° 

the most Christian King, etc. 

Reply to the Fourth Complaint concerning Virginia. 

Captain Argal claims that he has taken the French ship in ques- 
tion within the limits of our colony ; because that, against the privileges 
granted to the said company for the letters patent of the King, it 
thought proper to establish itself there by force ; and that what he has 



done in relation to it, was by virtue of the commission decreed to him 
for that effect, under the seal of the said company, which authority is 
derived from the special power granted by his Majesty to the said 
colony under the great seal, and that nevertheless the said ship was 
restored at the entreaty of the Ambassador. 

Notwithstanding which reply his Majesty wishing to make evident 
to the Ambassador the wish which he has to cause to be given to him 
every possible content and satisfaction has caused an order to be given 
that the said Captain Argal shall be represented to give account of his 
action every , and when the ambassador desires, and that Turner 

his lieutenant in like manner shall be represented as soon as he can be 

Reply to the Eighth Complaint, touching the Marchioness de Guercheville. 

As to Madame the Marchioness of Guercheville, she has no reason 
to complain ; nor to hope for any reparation ; seeing that her ship 
entered by force the territory of the said colony to settle there, and to 
trade without their permission, to the prejudice of our treaties and of 
the good understanding there is between our Kings. 

D[elivere]d ye Frfench] Amb[assador by] 

Mons Edmofndes] 
Answer to the French complayntes 1 

The subject was further discussed by Professor Torrey, Mr. 
George S. Hale, and Dr. Ellis. 

Mr. Goodell remarked that to any one familiar with, the 
change in the form of government which Massachusetts under- 
went upon the substitution of the charter of 1691 for the 
charter of King Charles, it is not a little perplexing to find 
that the supposed anachronism in the popular line, — 

" In good old colony times, when we lived under the king," — 

1 The parts in brackets are torn away. The above appears to be the endorse- 
ment upon the copy of this paper preserved in the English archives, in the French 
language. It says " delivered the French ambassador by Mons. Edmondes 1614." 
In a memorandum accompanying this paper, probably by Mr. Sainsbury, this 
official is styled " Sir Thomas Edmondes." He was the English minister to the 
court of France for many years, the period covering the date of this letter, 1614 ; 
yet he was temporarily in England for several months during the first half of 
this year. See Birch's " Court and Times of James I.," vol. i. pp. 296, 302, 323, 
324. — CD. 


as applied to the provincial period, is justified by the lan- 
guage of the Revolutionary leaders in their legislation, and 
other formal public acts after July, 1775. 

Besides other sufficient reasons for believing that this popu- 
lar phrase was not used in reference to the period of the first 
charter, it may be observed, in passing, that, though under the 
colony charter we owed fealty to the crown, our dependence 
upon the sovereign was not then peculiarly close. Barring 
the administration of Dudley and Andros, we enjoyed almost 
complete autonomy before 1692, even during the time of the 

The question which the following essay is intended to answer 
is, What led to the use of the word "colony" instead of 
"province," during, and after the dissolution of, the Pro- 
vincial Congress? 

The interest, if not importance, of this subject may perhaps 
be a sufficient excuse for recalling some Revolutionary events 
quite familiar, but which it is necessary to bear clearly in mind 
as we proceed to consider the doings of the General Court 
upon its re-establishment in the summer of 1775. 

On the 1st of September, 1774, Governor Gage issued writs 
for convening a new assembly at Salem, on the 5th of Octo- 
ber, following. As early as the 6th of August he had re- 
ceived from the Earl of Dartmouth a copy of the act of 
parliament, " for the better regulating the Government of the 
Massachusetts Bay," together with other important papers, 
including instructions from the Privy Council for carrying 
the act into operation. This act expressly repealed the pro- 
visions of the charter respecting the choice of councillors, and 
vested in the crown the authority to appoint the members 
of that board ; and, accordingly, a list of thirty-six coun- 
cillors — who, from the manner of their appointment, came to 
be generally known as mandamus councillors — was among 
the papers transmitted to the Governor from the Secretary of 

The publication of this act of parliament increased the re- 
sentment which the act for closing the port of Boston had 
provoked, and excited the indignation of the people to the 
highest pitch, insomuch that all but fourteen of the persons 
named by the king as councillors either voluntarily refused 
the trust or were forced to resign, and most of the remainder 



were virtually prisoners at Boston, under the protection of the 
royal forces. By the charter the councillors elected in May 
were to continue in office one year ; but, by the act of par- 
liament, their offices were vacated on the 1st of August, and 
the Governor, in issuing writs for the election of deputies to 
a new general court, had expected the new councillors to act 
with the representatives. Deeming it impracticable, in view 
of the increasing tumults in the vicinity of Boston, to con- 
vene a quorum of the Council, at Salem, the Governor, a week 
before the time fixed for the meeting of the representatives, 
issued a proclamation excusing them from appearing at, or 
holding, a general court. 

Notwithstanding this proclamation, ninety of the representa- 
tives elect assembled at the time and place appointed, and, 
after waiting in vain, the first day, for the Governor to appear, 
they organized, — choosing John Hancock chairman, and Ben- 
jamin Lincoln clerk. On the next day (October 7), they 
resolved themselves into a Provincial Congress, and ad- 
journed to meet at Concord, on the following Tuesday, where, 
on the 27th, they formally invited such members of the Coun- 
cil, chosen in May, as had not openly sided with the ministerial 
party to attend with them. 

This first Provincial Congress, which was adjourned from 
Oct. 29 to Nov. 23, was dissolved Dec. 10, 1774, having pre- 
viously passed a resolve recommending the several towns and 
districts to choose deputies to represent them in a second 
congress to be held at Cambridge on the 1st of February, 
following. The second congress, which had one adjournment, 
from Feb. 16 to March 22, was convened according to the 
above-mentioned recommendation ; and the date of the last 
record of its doings is May 29, 1775, although the journal 
after May 21 is not preserved. 

Two days after this last entry, a third congress was assem- 
bled at Watertown, upon a similar call. There were present 
229 delegates in the second congress, and 245 in the third 
congress, which continued in session until the General Court 
was re-established. 

In less than ten months from their first assembling, these 
congresses had assumed throughout the province, except 
within the town of Boston and the immediate vicinity actu- 
ally occupied by the king's forces, full control of the three 

1884.] THE TITLE " COLONY " AND " PROVINCE. " 10") 

great functions of government, — legislative, judicial, and ex- 
ecutive. Although no formal acts were passed in either of these 
congresses, their doings, both legislative and executive, had 
been, in most instances, general in their operation, and were 
so important, and frequently permanent, in their effect, that 
it was deemed essential to have their validity established in 
the most solemn manner. Accordingly, the first act of the 
General Court, after its re-establishment, was an act to ratify 
all the doings of the three congresses. 

This brings us to the consideration of the manner in which 
the resumption, by the General Court, of its functions under 
the charter was brought about, after they had been suspended 
for more than a year, by the operation of the act of parliament 
"for the better regulating the Government of the Province of 
Massachusetts Bay." 

As the time approached for issuing writs under the charter 
for a new assembly, in 1775, the Provincial Congress, then in 
session, began to consider what course it should recommend to 
the people to pursue in relation to the convening of the Gen- 
eral Court and the choice of representatives. 

It is likely that, notwithstanding the change made in the 
charter by the act of parliament "for the better regulating the 
Government of the Province," etc., the leaders of the popular 
party were not without hope that the effect of that act might 
in some way be avoided, either by its repeal or from neces- 
sity, since it was evident that the few mandamus councillors 
who had not resigned would never actually sit as a council, 
outside of Boston ; and a quorum of that branch was essential 
to the complete organization of the General Court. 

Whether influenced by this expectation, or simply by the 
determination that there should be no appearance of a design, 
on their part, to evade a dut}^ imposed by the charter, the 
Provincial Congress resolved, April 1, 1775, that if writs should 
be regularly issued for calling a general assembly to be held 
on the last Wednesday of May, the several towns ought to 
obey such precepts, and choose representatives, as usual, but 
advised that the representatives so chosen do no business with 
the council appointed by mandamus, and, if the house should 
be dissolved, then that the members re-assemble in a provin- 
cial congress. Another resolve was passed at the same time, 
recommending the towns to choose delegates to a new 


provincial congress in case no writs for calling an assembly 
were issued. 

The affair at Lexington on the 19th of April, however, 
changed the prevailing sentiment with regard to the duty of 
the people to respect the agents of the crown, and led them to 
take a further important step towards revolution. By the 
20th of April, Gage had issued writs for convening a new 
assembly, to be held on the last Wednesday of May. As soon 
as a copy could be procured, a committee was appointed to 
consider the propriety of recommending to the several towns 
and districts to take no notice of these precepts. This was 
April 28 ; and on the 4th of May, " after a long and seri- 
ous debate," a committee was appointed, by a vote of 94 out 
of 107 members, to bring in a resolve for reconsidering the 
resolve of the 1st of April. The next day, this committee 
reported two resolves, — one reconsidering and annulling the 
resolve of April 1, and the other declaring that no obedi- 
ence whatever ought in the future to be given to General 
Gage, but that "he ought to be considered and guarded 
against as an unnatural and inveterate enemy to this coun- 
try." The congress at the same time appointed a committee 
to prepare a resolve recommending the election of delegates 
" for a new provincial congress to be held on the last Wednes- 
day of the present month." 

The suggestions as to " resuming the first charter, absolute 
independency, etc.," 1 which, according to John Adams, had 
startled the delegates at the Continental Congress in Septem- 
ber, previous, were now earnestly renewed ; but it was con- 
cluded not to adopt measures which might be looked upon by 
the other colonies as extreme and unwarranted, without the 
advice and consent of the Congress at Philadelphia. On 
the 12th of May, therefore, upon the report of a committee of 
the whole house, a committee was appointed " by a very large 
majority " to submit the draught of an application to the Con- 
tinental Congress " for obtaining their recommendation for 
this colony to take up and exercise civil government as soon 
as may be, and that the committee be directed to ground the 
application on the necessity of the case." On the 15th the 
form of application reported by this committee was read, 

1 Letter to General Palmer, Sept. 26, 1774: John Adams's Works, vol. i. 
p. 154. 


" paragraph by paragraph," and accepted, and a messenger 
was forthwith despatched to deliver it to the president of the 

In answer to this application the Continental Congress 
adopted a resolve, June 9, 1775, to the effect that as no 
obedience was due to the act of parliament altering the charter 
of the province, " nor to a governor or a lieutenant-governor 
who will not observe the directions of, but endeavor to sub- 
vert, that charter, the governor and lieutenant-governor of 
that colony are to be considered as absent, and their offices 
vacant ; " and recommending the Provincial Congress, " in 
order to conform, as near as may be, to the spirit and sub- 
stance of the charter," to issue precepts for a general assem- 
bly which, " when chosen, do elect councillors ; and that such 
assembly, or council, exercise the powers of government until 
a governor of his Majesty's appointment will consent to govern 
the colony according to its charter." 

The third and last Provincial Congress was in session during 
the battle of Bunker's Hill, and, on the day after the battle, a 
committee was appointed who, on the 19th, reported the form 
of a precept for choosing deputies to represent the several towns 
at a general court, to be held, pursuant to the advice from Phil- 
adelphia, in the meeting-house at Watertown, on the 19th day 
of July, following. Precepts, issued in accordance with a 
prescribed form, were ordered to be sent to all towns and 
districts throughout the province. 

Two hundred and five deputies assembled at the time and 
place appointed for the meeting of the General Court ; and on 
the 21st of July they proceeded to the choice of twenty-eight 
councillors, fourteen of whom appear to have taken their seats 
at the board on the 26th, and seventeen on the 27th, of the 
same month. On the 28th, the House passed a preamble and 
resolve, to the effect that, the governor and lieutenant-governor 
having absented themselves, and refused to govern the province 
according to the charter, until they return to " their duty, or 
some governor shall be appointed to govern the province 
according to the charter," they will recognize the Council, or 
the major part of them, as governor, and will acquiesce in their 
doings as such. 

The new government thus organized — the legislative records 
of the Council, commonly called the General Court Records, 


beginning on the 26th of July — held sway, without any other 
executive head than the Council, until the adoption of the 

It is noticeable that in the correspondence between the Pro- 
vincial Congress and the Congress at Philadelphia the designa- 
tion of Massachusetts as a province was studiously avoided. 
This is explained b}^ the fact, which could no longer be ignored, 
that those relations with the parent state which made the gov- 
ernment of this people and territory distinctively provincial, 
had terminated. The authority of the immediate agents of the 
crown had been repudiated ; all supervision of our affairs by 
the Privy Council had practically ceased, and even Parliament, 
by overstepping the limits which, it was claimed, were pre- 
scribed for it by common right and the British Constitution, 
had, in the opinion of the popular party, forfeited all claim to 
obedience, at least so long as the unconstitutional legislation 
remained unrepealed. Up to this time, however, the belief 
which was cherished by many patriots, that separation from 
the mother country was not inevitable, had been generally 
deferred to, even by those who considered it delusive ; and 
hence the title " province " was replaced by that of " colony," 
to avoid the appearance of any intention to renounce all 
dependence upon Great Britain. 

Another objection, also, to retaining the word " province " 
arose from that provision of the charter which required all laws 
to be published under the province seal. This instrument was 
in the custody of the royal Governor, and had been affixed by 
him to proclamations and other official papers issued since his 
authority had been repudiated by the representatives of the 
people. There could be but one genuine seal of the province, 
and therefore it became necessary, in order to comply as 
nearly as possible with all the requirements of the charter, to 
establish a new public seal in character distinct from the seal 
previously used. Accordingly, on the 28th of July, an order 
was adopted appointing " a committee to consider what is 
necessary to be done relative to a colony seal." This commit- 
tee reported, on the 5th of August, "that the device of the old 
province seal be not taken up," but that a new device and 
motto submitted by them with the report, be adopted. The 
design proposed by this committee, with some changes, was 
agreed to, the same day, and on the 7th a joint committee was 


appointed " to direct the making " of the seal. This new seal 
continued to be affixed to the engrossments of the acts until 
towards the close of the May session, 177G, which was pro- 
rogued on the 13th of July. 

The former great seal of the province remained in the Coun- 
cil Chamber, at Boston, whence, together with all the other 
public seals, it was secretly purloined some time between the 
9th of September and the 4th of October, 1775. The loss of 
these insignia was considered so serious by the Governor that 
he immediately communicated the fact to Secretary Dart- 
mouth ; but before they could be replaced, the progress of the 
Revolution had rendered them useless. 

Early in the second session a question arose as to the proper 
wording of the introduction to be printed with the acts of the 
first session, and a committee was appointed to prepare a form 
for that purpose. To the draught reported to the council, by 
this committee, amendments, which included the substitution 
of "colony " for " province," were offered by the House, and, 
these amendments being concurred in, the resolve establishing 
this form was passed on the 30th of September, and this new 
heading, which is as follows : " Acts and Laws, Passed by the 
Great and General Court or Assembly of the Colony of the 
Massachusetts-Bay in New England," etc., continued to be 
used until the year 1778. 

The regal year continued to be given in all the acts before 
the act of April 13, 1776, which is the first act in which it 
was changed to the year of the Christian era, although the 
alteration was first made, on the 5th of April, in the bill of 
another act, which was not finally passed until a few days later. 
By the 1st of May, an act was passed requiring a similar change 
to be made in the precepts for convening the assembly, and in 
all legal processes, though the title of " colony " was still 
retained until the second session of the next assembly, when, 
tidings of the declaration of independence having been re- 
ceived during the previous vacation, the title of State 
began and continued to be used to designate the sovereign 





The meeting of the Society was held, as usual, on Thursday, 
the 12th instant, and the President, the Hon. Robert C. 
Winthrop, filled the chair. 

A report of the last meeting was read by the Recording 
Secretary and accepted. 

The additions by gift to the Library were stated by the 
Librarian, who referred to the bequest of Mr. Williams Latham, 
comprising one hundred and sixty-two volumes, all musical 
works. In these a special book-plate has been inserted, of 
which the following is a copy : — 

Bcqueatljeti to tjje 

Massachusetts Historical Society 





7 ISS3. 

RECEIVED MAY 22, 1884. 

The President presented a printed obituary notice in 
French of the historian Mignet, which had been sent by the 
family to this Society. He proceeded in these words : — 

During my absence from home, Gentlemen, for three or 
four weeks of April and May, I had some experiences not 
unworthy of mention here for a place in our records. At 
Washington, I was fortunate enough to witness the unveiling 
of a fine statue of Chief Justice Marshall, by our Correspond- 
ing Member, Mr. William W. Story. Seated in a chair care- 
fully copied from the one so long occupied by him in the 


Supreme Court of the United States, he is represented in the 
act of delivering one of his great opinions. The statue has a 
prominent place on the west front of the Capitol, and cannot 
fail to renew and perpetuate an impression of the. inestimable 
services of Marshall in giving a sound construction to the 
Constitution in the earliest stages of its existence. It will 
always have an additional interest, too, as the work of the 
accomplished son of one who was so long and lovingly asso- 
ciated with the great Chief Justice on the Supreme Bench. 
Marshall, we may well remember, was an Honorary Member 
of this Society, — having been chosen in 1809, a few years 
after he had published his voluminous and valuable " Life of 

At Philadelphia, by special invitation of Mr. Brinton Coxe, 
the recently elected President, I visited the new hall of the 
Pennsylvania Historical Societ}^, and found it most commodi- 
ous and attractive. It has at least one signal advantage over 
our own rooms in being on the ground floor, and as thus 
involving no high climbing over iron stairways. If we shall 
ever have as large an endowment as our Philadelphia friends 
have had, we may be privileged to occupy the lower stories 
of our own building. But I fear that such a consummation 
will not be reached — however devoutly it may be wished — 
until some of those who find the ascent most difficult shall 
have gone higher, and be out of the way of enjoying the 

At New York, our Corresponding Members, Dr. Moore and 
Dr. Allibone, were most kind in receiving me at the Lenox 
Library, where, among other new and notable acquisitions, I 
saw a large volume of autograph papers and original instru- 
ments connected with the poet Milton, and some important 
additions to the De Bry collection of Mr. Lenox, making it 
the most complete in the world, and, as a whole, altogether 

But, notwithstanding these and other enjoyments, I was 
sincerely sorry to have missed our last meeting, and espe- 
cially sorry to have lost the opportunity of hearing the com- 
munication of Mr. Lawrence in regard to his relations with 
the early history of Kansas and with the celebrated John 
Brown. I trust that this communication will soon be printed 
in full among the Proceedings of that meeting. There are 



few things more important to the ultimate truth of history 
than the seasonable correction of popular errors by those 
who have personal and positive knowledge that the}* are 

Mr. Lawrence has himself, by his generous contributions to 
our Library, made us in some sort the custodians and guar- 
dians of whatever relates to the late Civil War and to the 
exciting events which preceded it. There is probably nowhere 
else so complete a collection as that which he has given us, 
from time to time, of the books and pamphlets which have 
been published in such profusion in regard to that period. 
But we all know how many of those publications have been of 
a sensational, or, it may be, of a partisan or sectional character; 
and I think we shall all agree that misrepresentations and 
mistakes in the accounts of that period, whether relating to 
military or civil proceedings, should be exposed and corrected 
by those who discover them, before it is too late. 

Biographies and autobiographies, diaries, memoirs, reminis- 
cences, and recollections, succeed each other with marvellous 
rapidity in these days, and form a most attractive reading for 
us all. But so many errors find their way into this class of 
productions, by carelessness or prejudice or malice, that they 
can by no means be accepted as history. There is a good story 
of Mr. Jefferson, who was very systematic in cataloguing and 
classifying his library, and who, on receiving a copy of Wirt's 
" Life of Patrick Henry," said that he had been greatly per- 
plexed in deciding where to place the volume, but had finally 
arranged it under the head of Fiction. A terser expression on 
a kindred topic fell from the lips of Mr. Calhoun, while I was 
in the way of hearing him in the Senate, when he said, " Mr. 
President, I have long ago made up my mind that a Diary 
is evidence against no one but the writer of it." 

If we could be sure that these memoirs and recollections 
would be republished with annotations and corrections, even 
at the end of a hundred years, as Wraxall's have just been, 
they might be suffered to pass unnoticed now. But no such 
revision can be safely counted upon, and corrections must be 
made now or never. Following the good example of Mr. 
Lawrence, I propose to make one or two this afternoon. 

I have been examining with interest the Autobiography of 
the late Thurlow Weed, as recently published. It purports to 


have been commenced by him at Santa Cruz, on the 15th of 
February, 1845. But the second chapter is dated "New York, 
1st January, 1869," — twenty-four years later, — when Mr. 
Weed was in his seventy-second year ; and it states that the 
work had been suspended till then. Meantime the little 
preface by his respected and excellent daughter, by whom the 
volume was prepared for publication after her father's death, 
speaks of the Autobiography as " written at various periods, 
and frequently in detached fragments. " All this will amply 
account for any inaccuracies which may be found in the vol- 
ume, and will completely disarm every disposition to criticise it 

My attention has been particularly called to the early part 
of the sixty-sixth chapter, at page 634, where a very imperfect 
and incorrect account is given of an unofficial mission to 
Europe which was offered to several gentlemen of various parts 
of the country by Secretary Seward and President Lincoln 
in October, 1861. The language of the Autobiography is as 
follows : — ■ 

" Late in October, 1861, it was deemed important by the Administra- 
tion that some gentlemen of intelligence and experience, possessing a 
good knowledge of all the circumstances which preceded and occasioned 
the Rebellion, should be sent abroad to disabuse the public mind, espe- 
cially in England and France, where numerous and active agents of 
secession and rebellion had long been at work in quarters too ready to 
accept versions unfavorable to the North. Simultaneously I arrived at 
Washington (says Mr. Weed), and was informed by the Secretary of 
State that the late Edward Everett of Boston, and Archbishop Hughes 
of New York, J. P. Kennedy of Baltimore, and Bishop Mcllvaine of 
Ohio, had been invited to accept this mission, but that he was embar- 
rassed by the declension of Messrs. Everett and Kennedy. Mr. Everett 
(he continues), having formerly been our Minister at the Court of St. 
James, did not feel at liberty to accept an unofficial position ; Mr. 
Kennedy did not feel able to abandon his business and go abroad with- 
out compensation. The four gentlemen thus selected were informed by 
the Secretary of State that their actual expenses only would be paid. 
The Secretary then asked me to suggest two suitable persons to supply 
these vacancies. I named Mr. Winthrop of Boston, and Mr. Ewing of 
Ohio. He thought well of both, and said he would immediately suggest 
their names to the President and Cabinet. Archbishop Hughes, Bishop 
Mcllvaine, and Secretary Chase were to dine that day with Secretary 
Seward. I told him that I would drop in after his guests had left in 


the evening. I called at nine o'clock, and found the Archbishop, who 
had been informed that I was expected, waiting for me. And now I 
learned, greatly to my surprise and regret, that the Archbishop had 
declined. Of the four gentlemen designated, Bishop Mcllvaine alone 
had accepted. The Secretary, after I came in, resumed the conversation, 
and renewedly urged the Archbishop to accept ; but he persisted in his 
declination, repeating, as I inferred, the reasons previously given for 

Mr. Weed then proceeds to give an account of his own con- 
versation with the Archbishop and Mr. Seward, and to state 
the circumstances under which he himself accompanied the 
Archbishop on this mission on the 6th of November, 1861. Of 
this part of the narrative I have nothing to say, and do not 
question its accuracy. I wish only to correct the errors in 
the previous passages. 

Now, as a matter of fact, there were five gentlemen, not 
four, originally selected by Mr. Seward and President Lincoln 
for this unofficial mission, and it happened to me to be one of 
the five. On the 19th of October, 1861, 1 received a letter from 
the Secretary of State (still extant), dated the 17th, requesting 
me to come on to Washington to confer with him "upon a mat- 
ter of public concern." I left home accordingly on the 22d, 
and reported to the Secretary at Washington on the morning 
of the 24th. The public funeral of my friend and former col- 
league in Congress, Colonel Baker, who had been killed at 
Ball's Bluff a few days before, — which I attended, meeting 
the President and Cabinet there, — prevented me from having 
any formal conference with Mr. Seward during the day ; but 
I dined with him and his family in the evening, and he then 
unfolded the object of his summons. I here copy, from notes 
taken at the time, the communication made to me at his 
dinner-table on that evening: — 

" After we had been at table a short time, Governor Seward said 
that as all his family were members of the State Department, and 
knew how to observe confidence, he would tell me at once for what he 
had invited me to Washington. He said that though his despatches 
from abroad indicated that the opinion of foreign nations was more 
favorable to the North than it had been at first, yet it was considered 
highly important that every proper step should be taken to increase the 
good feeling of Europe towards the cause of the Union, and to counter- 
act the influences which might be produced by Southern agents and 


commissioners. With this view, it was the earnest wish of the Presi- 
dent, and of himself and Mr. Chase (Secretary of the Treasury), that 
a few gentlemen who were known abroad should make a visit to En£- 
land and France at an early day, and mingle with the leading men in 
London and Paris. For this purpose he had invited Mr. Everett and 
myself of Boston, Archbishop Hughes of New York, Bishop Mcllvaine 
of Ohio, and Mr. J. P. Kennedy of Baltimore, to come on to Washing- 
ton for a confidential consultation. Bishop Mcllvaine and Mr. Ken- 
nedy (he said) had dined with him sociably the day before, and, after a 
full understanding of the matter, had agreed to go. Archbishop Hughes, 
he added, was to be with him this evening; but from Mr. Everett he 
had not yet heard, — he being absent from home and the invitation not 
having reached him. He then said that it must necessarily be an un- 
official proceeding on our part, — a kind of volunteer service in the 
field of diplomacy ; but he added that the expenses of our trip would 
be defrayed, and every facility given us for speaking with authority. 
He urged me strongly to go. I told him that nothing would give me 
more satisfaction than to render any service to the cause of the Union 
at home or abroad, and that I felt highly complimented in being in- 
cluded in such a proposal, — adding, however, that my obligations to my 
family, under the peculiar circumstances in which it was placed by a 
recent domestic bereavement, threw a doubt on my ability to leave 
home just now. But I promised to give the subject my best considera- 
tion, and to go if I could. 

" We had hardly finished dinner when Archbishop Hughes was an- 
nounced, and we all went up to the drawing-room, where Mr. Seward 
repeated to him all that he had previously said to me. 

" The next day (Friday) I called first on the President. Mr. Seward 
and Archbishop Hughes met me by appointment in the anteroom, and 
we went in together to the President's library. The President alluded 
at once to the subject of our being called to Washington, and seemed 
earnestly desirous that we should give him an affirmative answer." 

I forbear from any account of our conversation with Presi- 
dent Lincoln, in which he displayed some of his characteristic 
qualities of wit as well as wisdom, as it would interrupt the 
current of this explanation ; but I recall it as full of entertain- 
ment. On the following morning I spent an hour with Mr. 
Seward at the State Department. It was closed to all but 
foreign ministers; but I was at once admitted to a conference, 
and the Secretary placed in my hand a long and interesting 
despatch, just received from England, which had given him, 
as it certainly gave me, a more hopeful impression that there 


would be no interference, on the part of Great Britain, with 
our prosecution of the War for the Union. I then spent a few 
minutes with the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Chase, who 
urged me strongly to comply with Mr. Seward's request and 
go abroad. 

Meantime my friend Mr. Kennedy had written to me to 
come down and pass Sunday with him, that we might consult 
together in regard to this unofficial mission ; and I left Wash- 
ington in the afternoon for his cottage at Ellicott's Mills. I 
found that we entirely agreed in our views of the matter, — 
both of us having many doubts as to the wisdom of the pro- 
ceeding, in view of the danger of interference with our accred- 
ited ministers abroad, and both foreseeing some embarrassments 
in our going at once to Europe, but both of us resolved to make 
any personal sacrifices in our power to comply with the wishes 
of Mr. Seward and the President. To say nothing of myself, 
Mr. Kennedy had then virtually accepted the appointment, as 
Mr. Seward had told me, and fully contemplated going abroad 
at an early day. I may add that Archbishop Hughes had 
already more than implied, in his conference with the Presi- 
dent, Mr. Seward, and myself, that he was both disposed and 
ready to go, as he soon afterwards did go. 

And now as to Mr. Everett. It happened that he was 
absent from home, and was thus out of the way of receiving 
the summons to Washington for several days after the occur- 
rences I have stated. But nothing could be less correct than 
the statement of Mr. Weed that he had embarrassed the Gov- 
ernment by " his declension " of the mission. Returning to 
Boston a few days afterwards, and there receiving Mr. 
Seward's request for a conference, Mr. Everett proceeded to 
Washington without delay, and there wrote to me on the 3d 
of November as follows : — 

My dear Mr. Winthrop, — I have yours of the 30th. I was very 
sorry not to see you before I left home. I have had one short conver- 
sation with Mr. S. since I came here, and have not been able to possess 
myself fully of his views on the application he has made to us. I shall 
probably see him again to-day or to-morrow. Kennedy has written to 
me that he will come down to-morrow. . . . 

I am very doubtful whether I shall be able to accede to Seward's 
proposal. I have appointments to speak in great number, from which T 
could not well disengage myself without assigning the cause, which he 


does not wish clone. I do not care to cross the Atlantic in December, 
and I could not earlier; and the health of my eldest son is such as 
makes me very unwilling to leave him. . . . 

I shall not stay here beyond Friday, and I fear that I may be called 
home sooner to my son. 

Ever sincerely yours, 

Edward Everett. 

And now I will read a letter from Mr. Kennedy, which 
explains the whole matter both as to himself and Mr. Everett, 
and, I may add, as to myself also. 

Baltimore, Madison St., Nov. 10, 1861. 

My dear Winthrop, — I went to Washington on Monday last, and 
there met Everett. Seward having gone to New York, I returned home 
the same evening, promising Everett to come back on Thursday, that 
we might have an interview together with the Secretary. . . . 

I returned to Washington on Thursday, knowing that I was not to 
meet Mr. Everett, who had written to me the sad cause that hastened 
him home. My object was to make definitive arrangements with the 
Secretary for my departure by the " Persia " on the 20th, and to leave 
here next Thursday. I saw him that morning and again the next 
morning. He told me that the last despatches from England and 
France had announced a most satisfactory and significant change of 
opinion in both countries, and that now everything began to authorize 
the hope of a decided policy of non-intervention throughout Europe. 
This led me to suggest to him the question whether this change did not 
make it desirable to postpone, at least for the present, the purpose con- 
templated in our mission. I said that it struck me as a matter of some 
moment that the Government should not appear too sensitive to the 
opinion of those who were hostile to us, when it had such assurances as 
he had received of the determination of the Ministry in England and 
France to forbid any interference with the blockade, etc. He replied 
that the Cabinet had been in conference on the subject since the receipt 
of the despatch, and although they did not attach as much importance 
to the service proposed as before, they still thought it would be well for 
us to go. He himself, however, concurred with me in thinking that it 
might be better to wait until we heard something of the reception of 
Mason and Slidell, and more especially of the impression which might 
be made by the President's Message, which would be likely to bring the 
questions touching the war, and our views of what was due to us from 
foreign governments, to a definite point for their consideration. I 
assured him that I would much rather wait for some future emergency 
which might render our services useful, than go to England now With 


a conviction that we should have very little to do in the line of duty he 
required. He said he was gratified that I took this view of the subject, 
and that he would assume upon himself, notwithstanding the decision 
of the Cabinet, to postpone for the present the purpose of urging our 
departure. He added he would write to me hereafter on the matter, 
and if events should require an early resumption of the scheme, he 
would let me know. And so we parted. This leaves me, very much 
to my content, the hope of a quiet domestication at home for the 
winter. . . . 

Yours ever, 

J. P. K. 

These letters from Mr. Everett and Mr. Kennedy, of which 
the originals are in my hands, and from which I have omitted 
nothing which related to the subject, prove clearly that Mr. 
Weed was greatly mistaken in his account of the matter. 
They show that Mr. Everett had not declined the service on 
the ground that, " having formerly been our Minister at the 
Court of St. James, he did not feel at liberty to accept an 
unofficial position," or on any other ground ; and that if there 
was any embarrassment at Washington occasioned by him, it 
was simply owing to his having been absent from home and 
not receiving Mr. Seward's request for a conference until many 
days after it had reached the rest of us. These letters prove 
also that he went to Washington as soon as he had received 
the summons on his return home, and had an interview with 
the Secretary on the subject, and that he was to have had a 
second consultation with him and Mr. Kennedy the next day, 
but was suddenly called back to Boston by the death of his 
eldest son. I may add, from my own personal knowledge at 
the time, that Mr. Everett held the subject of going abroad 
under deliberation for many weeks, and even months, after- 
wards, and was ready to do so at any moment when he could 
see his way clear to rendering any service to the Government. 

Meantime Mr. Kennedy's letter abundantly shows that so 
far from having declined, on the ground that he did " not feel 
able to abandon {lis business and go abroad without compensa- 
tion," he had accepted the appointment at once, and that he 
went a second time, and even a third time, to Washington "to 
make definite arrangements with the Secretary for his depart- 
ure by the 'Persia' on the 20th of November." His letter 
amply explains the circumst nces and views which led to the 


abandonment of this arrangement, and to the postponement, 
with the full concurrence of Mr. Seward, of the plan for any 
of us going. 

I have not the slightest idea that Mr. Weed had any pur- 
pose to do injustice to any of the parties concerned in this 
matter, or that he knowingly misrepresented the facts of the 
case. It is plain that he was ignorant of those facts at the 
time, and made up his account from his own impressions long 
afterwards. Indeed, he was quite out of the way of knowing 
anything about the relations to the matter of Mr. Kennedy, 
Mr. Everett, or myself. Neither of us met him at Washing- 
ton; and if we had met him, the strictest confidence had been 
enjoined upon us by the Secretary, and we could not have 
communicated with him or any one else on the subject. But, 
as a matter of fact, he had left Washington, according to his 
own account, long before Mr. Everett arrived there, and had 
sailed for England, with Archbishop Hughes, four days before 
the date of my letter from Mr. Kennedy. His account of the 
matter clearly shows, that he was too much absorbed in his 
own relations with Archbishop Hughes and with his own 
preparations for embarking, to make any inquiries as to what 
others were proposing to do, or f o get any accurate informa- 
tion as to what actually occurred. should be the last person 
to speak unkindly of him or of his . ' iography. My rela- 
tions to him during the later years of his life were of the most 
friendly character, and I had formed a warm personal regard 
for him. His work is one of great interest, and exhibits a 
career of marvellous activity and ability. But as I am the 
only survivor of the five persons originally selected for this 
unofficial mission, I am unwilling that friends whose memories 
are so dear to me as those of Mr. Everett and Mr. Kennedy, 
should suffer by so inaccurate an account of their course, how- 
ever unintentional or accidental the mistake may have been. 

In a cursory examination of the second of the Weed volumes, 
subsequently published, and entitled a " Memoir of Thurlow 
Weed," I have observed another allusion to myself which 
requires a slight correction. It will be found on page 363, and 
is as follows : — 

" In 1852 Mr. Weed was apprised of those benevolent purposes 
which Mr. Peabody afterwards so nobly carried into effect. They dis- 
cussed together his first great project for relieving the poor of London. 



When Mr. Peabody visited this country, in 1866, he communicated to 
Mr. Weed his then immature scheme for the education and elevation of 
the Southern poor. He urged Mr. Weed to act as trustee ; but this 
honor was declined in favor of Robert C. Winthrop." 

Now I am well aware that Mr. Peabody had a warm per- 
sonal regard for Mr. Weed, and it is not impossible or improb- 
able that he gave him some early intimation of his idea of 
making a provision for the education of the children in the 
States which had been desolated by the War for the Union. 
But when Mr. Peabody returned from England, and came out 
to Brookline, by appointment, on the 3d of October, 1866, — 
immediately after his arrival, — and spent some days with me 
in confidential consultation, four months before this great 
Southern benefaction was divulged, he gave me expressly to 
understand that no human being had been made acquainted 
with this particular purpose of his, and placed the whole mat- 
ter unreservedly in my hands, as being altogether undecided 
upon. I may add that in all our repeated conferences about 
the members of the board to which the trust should be com- 
mitted, — the ultimate selection of whom he left mainly to 
myself, — no New York names were ever mentioned except 
those of Governor Fish, Mr. Evarts, and Mr. Wetmore ; and 
those were at once agreed upon. 

Mr. Weed, in a published letter to the editor of the New 
York " Commercial Advertiser," — soon after the death of Mr. 
Peabody, in November, 1869, — stated this matter somewhat 
differently : " I was much with Mr. Peabody," he says, " in 
1861, while he was maturing his first great contribution to the 
poor of London. When he arrived here, in 1866, he commu- 
nicated his then immature programme for the education and 
elevation of the Southern poor, and consulted with me in rela- 
tion to suitable men for trustees. And it may be proper to 
say here, that the beneficent plan finally adopted was the 
suggestion of the Hon. Robert C. Winthrop." This state- 
ment, in Mr. Weed's own words, may be left to speak for 
itself. The language of his recent biography is less con- 
sistent with an account of this memorable transaction, which 
I had occasion to give to my fellow trustees at their annual 
meeting in 1877, in describing " the origin and progress of the 
Peabody Education Trust." In that account I find nothing to 


Judge Chamberlain laid before the Society a copy of a 
very early map of Eastern Massachusetts, and said that the 
little that is known of its history is as follows: — 

Mr. Henry F. Waters, now in England, exploring the sources 
of genealogical and historical information, while searching the 
Map Department of the British Museum, at the request of our 
associate, Mr. John T. Hassam, for the map of the Carolina 
coast, a copy of which was published in our Proceedings (vol. 
xx. p. 402), accidentally came upon two other maps, one of 
which was entitled "Massachusetts in N. Englande;" and the 
other, " A Draught of Boston Harbor." This information 
having been communicated to the librarian of the Public 
Library, and by him to the trustees of that institution, they 
directed that copies of both these maps should be obtained. 
The map of Massachusetts is now before the Society. The 
plan of the harbor, which is understood to be that of Cyprian 
Southack in 1694, is being copied, and in due time will reach 
this city. 1 

These maps formed a part of the Sloane Collection, which 
was the foundation of the British Museum ; but from what 
source they came into the possession of Sir Hans may never be 
known, though inquiry will be made. 

It appears to have been the design of the draughtsman to 
include in this map that part of the Massachusetts Patent 
bounded on the east by the sea ; on the north and south by 
east and west lines running three miles north and south, re- 
spectively, of the Merrimack and the Charles ; and on the 
west by a line about a mile westerly of the Musketaquit, or 
Concord River, the rise of which in Lake Cochituate, and north- 
ward flow through the Sudbury Meadows to the Merrimack, is 
clearly shown. The position of the hills, ponds, and rivers in 
this territory, as also the seats of the Indian tribes, and Eng- 
lish settlements, though not the result of exact measurements, 
is laid down with considerable accuracy. The road to Ply- 
mouth on the south is shown ; and so are the roads between 
Medford and Lynn, and from thence to Ipswich, and that 
between Lynn and Salem. The following are the names of 
the settlements given on the map: Wessaguscus, Conyhas- 
sett, Nataskett, Dorchester, Rocksbury, Boston, Newtowne, 
Waterton, Char:towne ; Meadford, Winesemett, Pullin Pointe, 

1 It has since been received. 


Nottle's I., Deere I., Sagus, Nahant, Marble Harbour, Salem, 
Agawam, Anasquam, and Cape Ann. 

This map is twenty and a half inches from north to south, 
by fourteen inches from east to west. Besides the names of 
places, etc., given on the map itself, information as to partic- 
ular points and objects is found in the margin, by the follow- 
ing memoranda in the hand of Governor Winthrop : — 

A : 1 An Hand cont 100 : acres where the Governour hath an orchard 
& a vinyarde. 

B. Mr Humfryes ferme house at Sagus. 
Ten Hills : The Governours ferme house. 
Meadford : Mr. Or adocks ferme house. 

C. The Wyndmill \ , „ , 

D. The forte j * *""*• 

E. The weere. 

So far as the rivers are laid thus ^~^~^^ ^ , they are navigable with 
the tide. 

There is also a " Scale of 10 : Italian miles, 320 : perches to 
the mile, not taken by instrument but by estimate/' 

The date of this interesting map is nowhere given. If 
the indication of the site of the windmill at Boston was made 
contemporaneously with the date of the map, it was later than 
1632, since in July of that year " the windmill was brought 
down to Boston, because, where it stood near Newtown, it 
would not grind but with a westerly wind ; " but how much 
later can only be determined approximately. 

The towns at that early period were so few that it may be 
fairly assumed that any map of the section in which they were 
situated would indicate their existence ; and consequently, if 
any such places do not appear on the map, it follows that it 
was made before their erection. 

Now, neither Newbury, on the north, which was made a town 
May 6, 1035, nor Dedham, on the south, which was made a 
town Sept. 8, 1636, appears on this map. B}^ this test the 
date of the map was prior to May, 1635. It was probably a 
year earlier, at least, as may be conjectured from the following 

The draughtsman would undoubtedly give to each town rep- 
resented on the map the name it bore at the date of the 

1 The above capital letters refer to corresponding letters on the map. 


draught. Between 1634 and 1637 the General Court made the 
following changes in the names of towns: Agawam to Ipswich, 
Aug. 5,1634; Newtowne to Cambridge, Sept. 8, 1634; Bear 
Cove to Hingham, and Wessaguscus to Weymouth, Sept. 2, 
1635, and Sagus to Lynn, Nov. 20, 1637. But the map, in all 
these cases, gives the earlier name ; and the inference is, that 
it was made prior to Aug. 5, 1634, when Agawam became 

Approximately, therefore, we find the date of the map be- 
tween August, 1632, and August, 1634. Whoever may have 
written the names of the towns and rivers on the map, any one 
acquainted with Winthrop's handwriting will at once recog- 
nize it in the memoranda in the margin. But a question arises 
when he affixed the marginalia to the map. Presumably prior 
to the changes of names made by the General Court, all of 
which he mentions in his " Journal." But this conclusion 
applies only to those names which had been the subject of 
change, and involves some difficulties. 

But if we are right in fixing the date of the map before May, 
1634, then it will appear that the marginalia must have been 
added some years later; because "Mr. Humfryes ferme house 
at Sagus," would hardly, though possibly, have been erected 
before he came over in July, 1634 ; and still less likely before 
he had title to the land on which it was built, which was 
nearly a year later, or May 6, 1635. And so of "Mr Cradocks 
ferme house at Meadford," which was built on land granted 
in March 4, 1635. 

Nor is it easy to see how these notes could have been made 
at any time between May 14, 1634, and May 17, 1637. The 
first entry in the margin is that of u an Hand cont 100: acres 
where the Governour hath an orchard & a vinyarde." Now 
Winthrop could not have styled himself as the Governor dur- 
ing the three years (1634-36) during which the chair was held 
successively by Dudley, Haynes, and Vane. 

Nor is this all. Unless the General Court was slack in 
payment of services rendered, the entry under the great river 
on the northerly side of the map, in the hand of the Gov- 
ernor and in these words, — " Merimack river it runnes 100 
miles up into the Country and falls out of a pond 10 : miles 
broad," — could not have been made before 1639, as appears 
from the following entry in the Colony Records, under June 


6th of that year: " Goodm Nathaniell Woodward was ordered 
to have three pounds for his journey to discover the running 
up of Merrimack." 1 

But a difficulty remains. If Winthrop made these entries 
for the information, as is possible, of some persons in England 
meditating emigration to Massachusetts, why should he have 
failed to indicate the changed nomenclature of important 
towns ? 

An interesting question arises as to the person who 
draughted this map. Was it Winthrop himself? Judging from 
the accuracy of the sketch of the Salem shore which he made 
on shipboard, as he was approaching the coast, he did not lack 
the requisite skill as a draughtsman. But the person. most 
likely to have been the draughtsman was Thomas Graves, the 
engineer, who, in his contract with the New England Company, 
March 10, 1628-9, describes himself as skilful and experi- 
enced "in describing a country b}' mappe." 2 We know that 
he made a plan of Charles town, and was often consulted 
respecting the division of land. His description of the country 
in a letter sent to England shows that he was familiar with 
it. 3 But the most serious objection to this hypothesis is the 
total dissimilarity of the handwriting on the map to Graves's 
signature, a fac-simile of which may be found in Frothingham, 
page 140. 

A more careful examination than has been found convenient 
will be necessary to settle satisfactorily the questions as to the 
date and source of this interesting map. 

Mr. Upham said : — 

In connection with the important discovery of which Judge 
Chamberlain has given us an account, I desire to call the atten- 
tion of the Society to a sketch or chart made by Governor 
Winthrop of the headlands and islands seen by him on his 
approach to this coast in 1680, and also to a map of the general 
outline of the North Shore, as we call it now, from Gloucester 
to Marblehead. The chart will be found on page 23 of his 
Journal, apparently left blank for the purpose. The map is on 
page 170. 

i Mass. Col. Rec, vol. i. p. 261. 2 Ibid., p. 32. 

8 Frothiinghani's History of Charlestown, p. 27. 


This map, simple as it is, lias a very peculiar value and inter- 
est. It is, I presume, the first of the kind made by an actual 
and permanent resident of the colony ; and, so far as it goes, 
it is quite minute and accurate, presenting to us in a most 
interesting manner the general appearance of the coast to an 
intelligent observer, as seen by him for the first time, probably 
from some elevated position on shipboard. 

At a meeting of the Essex Institute in 1870, I read a paper 
on the first settlement of Salem, giving as well as I could, from 
a careful study of the records, the location of the first houses 
and house-lots, and the plan upon which the town was origi- 
nally laid out. A mistaken idea had long prevailed that the 
earliest settlement was at Collins' Cove, on that part of Salem 
which extends northward towards Beverly, where there was, 
and still is, a large area of marsh land, known as the " Old 
Planters' Marsh." All the evidence of the records, however, 
proves that the first buildings were in what is now the central 
part of the city, near where the Eastern Railroad passes through 
it. To help me in sustaining this record evidence, I was 
allowed to make a tracing of Winthrop's sketch of 1630, to 
exhibit at that meeting. The peninsula upon which Salem 
is situated is there exhibited with remarkable correctness; and 
the manner in which the South River is delineated confirms 
the belief that it was the narrow and winding channel of that 
river which Winthrop describes in his Journal as having 
rendered it necessary to "warp" his vessel. Collins' Cove, 
which is a shallow inlet laid bare at low tide, is hardly repre- 
sented at all. I have given this particular statement to show 
why the sketch of 1630 is specially interesting to me, and as a 
reason for my expressing a hope that the Society will cause 
it to be suitably published, in connection with this later map, 
apparently by the same hand. 

As to the plan or map now exhibited, it confirms in a marked 
manner the opinion above stated as to the location of the first 
houses in Salem. It would seem that the date of its draught- 
ing must have been between 1632 and 1635. Were it not for 
the houses of Humphrey and Cradock, which would probably 
carry it to 1634, I believe there is nothing to conflict with as 
early a date as 1633. The highways and the names of places 
indicate that year. If the date had been later, it would seem 
probable that the settlement at Agawam would have been 


called Ipswich. I do not find the name "Marble Harbor" used 
after 1634. 

In connection with the mention of Humphrey's house, it 
may be interesting to read a copy of a paper which I found 
a few days ago among the mass of Court Files at Suffolk 
Court House, which have recently been placed in my charge 
for arrangement. 

John Putnum of Lawfull age testifieth & saith y* to his sartain 
knowledge about Sixty years scence Collo 11 John huinphrys did Hue one 
and Improue the plaine farme or farme commonly known by the name 
of M r humpheryes plaine or farme Lyeing neare unto Marble head : & 
bordering on M r Petters farme: & forest Eiuer; I this deponent did 
work one sd farme for diverse years together ; in carting Timber &c ; 
and did frequent M r humpheryes house one sd farme in the above sd 
time and farther I the deponent doe testifie y* Coll 11 Humphreys did 
improue sd farme by building Plowing and fenceing of sd [farme] and 
was reputed his for diverse years ; and neuer knew anything to the 
contrary and farther adds that this farme was called plain farme neare 
to a farme called Swampscutt where the Lady Moody lived and to the 
Eastward with Peters \_Devereuxes previously written but cancelled] 

Ipswich May 21, 1702 Sworne in Court 
Attests Elisha Cooke Cls. 

Dr. Clarke then spoke substantially as follows in reference 
to John Brown of Osawatomie : — 

I did not have the opportunity of hearing Mr. Lawrence's 
remarks on John Brown at our last meeting; being, like your- 
self, sir, outside of the State at that time. What I wish to say 
now, is not therefore intended as a reply to Mr. Lawrence, 
whose generous efforts in behalf of Kansas, made in her dark- 
est hours, contributed, as we know, more than those perhaps of 
any one else, toward making her a free State. But I wish to 
express my dissent from a view taken by some persons to the 
effect that Brown was an unprincipled ruffian, delighting in 
bloodshed, and ready to stir up an insurrection among slaves, 
no matter what might happen to their masters. This notion 
is false. John Brown was a Puritan of the type of Cromwell's 
troopers, who took the Old Testament view of the way of 
treating one's enemies, rather than that of the New Testa- 


merit. He believed in fighting fire with fire. He cherished 
no ill-will toward any human being ; there was no malice or 
desire for vengeance in his constitution. Till he was fifty- 
five years old lie had lived in various parts of the country, 
passing a sober, industrious, honest, and peaceable life. Every- 
where he was respected as an upright man, seeking to obey 
all laws, human and divine. His faith in " the higher law " 
only meant this, — that when the law of God and that of man 
were in conflict, " we must obey God rather than man." 

The Missouri Compromise of 1820 admitted Missouri into 
the Union as a slave State, but forbade the existence of slavery 
in any Territory north of 36° 30'. Having secured their share 
of the bargain, the slave-power succeeded in repealing the 
other side, which was in favor of freedom ; and slavery was no 
longer prohibited from entering Kansas. The only way to 
prevent this evil was by settling it with men from the free 
States who should be favorable to liberty. For this purpose 
the Emigrant Aid Societies were formed, and John Brown 
with his sons went to Kansas to assist in this object. But the 
slave-power determined to defeat it, not only by sending slave- 
holders into Kansas, as they had a right to do, but by estab- 
lishing a reign of terror, which should drive the free-State 
settlers out of the Territory. For this purpose men were 
taken from their homes, tortured and murdered, for no offence 
except that they wished Kansas to be a free State. The peo- 
ple of Missouri invaded Kansas, and drove the free-State men 
from the polls. The United States Government was on the 
slaveholders' side, and gave neither protection nor redress to 
the other party. Dow, a free-State settler, was shot down in 
open day. Barber was shot dead by an Indian agent. Baker 
was taken from his house, whipped, hung to a tree till half 
dead, then released on condition of leaving Kansas. Sherman 
(one of those put to death by Brown) was engaged in these 
barbarities, and threatened that if the other free-State men did 
not leave they would share the fate of Baker. Bondi, who 
knew all the facts, says that Sherman (called " Dutch Bill ") 
was a giant, six feet four inches high ; and for some weeks 
before his death, he, in company with the Doyles, had broken 
into the houses of the free-State settlers, insulted their women, 
and ill-treated any men whom they found alone. One woman 
had been so terrified that she died of the fright. Other women 



were begging for protection against these ruffians, for them- 
selves and their children. John Brown regarded it as a state 
of war, and determined to protect these families by extermi- 
nating this nest of murderers ; and after they were killed the 
country had peace. 

A friend of mine, the Rev. Ephraim Nute, went out to 
Kansas as a missionary ; but as he was one of the free-State 
emigrants, he was threatened with death if he remained. One 
Sunday morning, the news came to Boston that he had been 
seized by the Border ruffians, and was in danger of being 
killed. I tried to think what I could do to save him. Per- 
haps you, Mr. Winthrop, will remember that I came to your 
house that Sunday afternoon, and asked you if you knew 
Colonel Sumner (afterward General Sumner), then command- 
ing the United States troops in Kansas, and if you would write 
to him to interfere and save Mr. Nute's life. You answered 
most promptly and cordially that you would do so. " Tell me 
what to say," said you, " and I will write it." Accordingly 
you wrote an earnest appeal to Colonel Sumner, and handed 
it to me to mail. I presume that letter may have had much to 
do with Mr. Nute's escape. This illustrates the condition of 
things in Kansas at that time. 

It is easy for us, living in a land of law and order, to de- 
nounce such an act as that of John Brown, and call it a cold- 
blooded assassination ; but I imagine we should have felt 
differently if we were living with our wives and children in 
the neighborhood of men who had threatened their lives, and 
who had already committed numerous outrages. There was 
no law to punish these men or defend these innocent families. 
The same state of things which produced the Vigilance Com- 
mittees of California, who also took the lives of offenders with- 
out any process of law, then existed in Kansas. 

I am not defending John Brown's conduct as justifiable by 
the Christian code, — you cannot carry on war according to 
the principles of the Gospel, — but I am showing that John 
Brown may have been a sober, just, and peaceable man, and 
yet have felt it his duty to take the only way in his power to 
put a stop to the atrocities then being perpetrated. He no 
doubt believed it an act of self-defence to take the lives of 
these ruffians. Jesse Brown, in his reply to Mr. Utter, in the 
" North American Review," says: "From my earliest recollec- 


tion of my father, he was the most conscientious man I ever 
knew ; and I am sure that nothing but the sternest sense of 
duty could have induced him to cause the death of these men 
on Potawatomie Creek." The Doyles had been slave-hunters 
before they came to Kansas, and they brought two of their 
bloodhounds with them. Dutch Bill (Mr. Sherman) had 
amassed considerable property by robbing cattle-drovers and 
emigrants. Wilkinson was one of the principal leaders in all 
attempts to annoy and extirpate the free-State men. On the 
very day of his death he had threatened some of them that in 
a few days they would be either dead or driven out of the 
Territory. This is the testimony of Bondi, who was living 
in that neighborhood, and himself knew all these persons. 
The leaders of the pro-slavery party ,had publicly declared 
that they would neither give nor receive quarter, and had 
announced beforehand a war of extermination. 

I think that my friend Mr. Lawrence is mistaken in speak- 
ing of John Brown's " design at Harper's Ferry of exciting a 
servile insurrection." I saw Brown just before he went to 
Virginia, and he told me that he meant to repeat in another 
part of the country what he had done in Missouri, by taking 
the slaves from the border slave-States into a land of freedom. 
His design was not insurrection, but to set the slaves free, and 
take them into a free State. In this way, he thought, slavery 
would be made insecure, and gradually pushed farther south. 
His plan was unsound, and its failure was certain. But it was 
not slave insurrection which he intended. 

John Brown will remain, I believe, a monumental figure ; a 
survival of the old Covenanters, who carried a sword in ftne 
hand and a Bible in the other. He was such a man as those 
whom Scott has so well described in "Old Mortality." I have 
no doubt that the final verdict of history will confirm the 
opinion of Governor Andrew, — "Whatever we may think of 
John Brown's actions, John Brown himself was right." 

Mr. Deane read an extract from an article which appeared 
in the "Cambridge Tribune" of the preceding week, on " The 
Statue of John Harvard," in which the writer, after speaking 
of the donor and the artist, proceeded to say that " the statue 
will be as near a portrait one as the very few pictures of John 
Harvard now remaining will allow." So, said Mr. Deane, we 


are fast realizing the forebodings of the President, in his re- 
marks at the last October meeting of the Society, about 
" mythical statues " and " the confusing and confounding of 
historical truth." Every one present knows that no picture 
or image of John Harvard has come down to us, and that the 
accomplished artist has been obliged to draw upon his own 
resources in modelling the ideal features of his subject; and 
in this respect he has been particularly happy in receiving 
suggestions and inspiration from sources which private friend- 
ship has laid open to him. We are fast collecting a gallery of 
doubtful and fictitious portraits of the fathers and founders of 
New England. We have a portrait of John Wilson, the min- 
ister of the first church in Boston, and of John Cotton, his 
associate, and of John Eliot, the apostle to the Indians, and of 
Roger Williams, the apostle of religious freedom. Probably, 
if the canvas could speak, no one of these pictured worthies 
would claim to be the " lively effigies " of the distinguished 
original. And now we are to include in that gallery a " portrait 
statue " of John Harvard. 

Mr. Hassam communicated some notes which had been 
forwarded to him from London in relation to certain researches 
now making with regard to the parentage and ancestry of John 
Harvard, and he stated that there were strong reasons for be- 
lieving that the mystery which has so long enveloped this sub- 
ject is about to be dispelled by the exhaustive search upon 
which Mr. Henry F. Waters is now engaged. 

Mr. Goodell submitted, without reading, the following 
copy of a commission of oyer and terminer for the trial for 
murder of the Indian, Mamoosin, at Salem, in 1703, which 
Mr. William P. Upham recently discovered in the Clerk's 
Office at Salem, This is the only commission of the kind 
known to be in existence ; the commission printed in the 
Proceedings (vol. xx. p. 321), being of a form under a special 


Anne, by the Grace of God of England, Scot- 
land, France and Ireland Queen Defender of 
the Faith &c. — 

TO our Trusty and Welbeloved John Hathorne, 
William Browne, Jonathan Corwin, 
Benjamin Browne & John Higginson 
Esq r f Greeting. 



Know yee That we have assigned you or any 
three of you (whereof either of you the before named John Hatiiorne 
and William Browne we will to be one) Our Justices, for this time 
to enquire by the Oaths of good and lawful men, Inhabitants of Our 
County of Essex within Our Province of the Massachusetts Bay in 
New England, and by other ways, means and methods, by which the 
Truth of the matter may be the better known of all Felonies, Murders, 
homicides and manslaughters committed by a certain Indian named 
Mamousin now in Custody within Our Goal in the county afores?/ on 
whome, when, how and in what manner done and perpetrated, and of 
other Articles and circumstances, the premisses or any of them in anywise 
concerning. And the same Felonies, Murders homicides and Man- 
slaughters to hear and determin according to Law. And therefore We 
comand you That at Salem within the county of Essex afores*?. at a cer- 
tain day on or before the Tenth day of December next comeing, which 
you or any Three of you (whereof either of you the before named John 
Hathorne and William Browne we will to be one) shall appoint 
for that purpose, you diligently make inquiry upon the premisses, and all 
and Singular the premisses hear and determin, and to do and Accomplish 
those things in forme afores*?-' thereupon, which unto Justice appertaineth 
to be done according to Law. And such Order process, Judgement and 
Execution to be used, had, done and made against the said Indian, so 
being convicted of any of the Offences above mentioned respectively as 
by Law is Accustomed. Saving to us our amerciaments and other 
things to us thereupon belonging Also we Command Our Sheriffe 
of Our s^ County, That at the day and place aforesaid, which you or 
Three of you (whereof either of you the before named John Hathorne 
& William Broavne we will to be one) shall make known unto him, 
to cause to come before you or three of you (whereof either of you the 
before named John Hathorne & William Browne we will to be 
one) such and so many good and Lawful men of his Bailywick by 
whom the Truth of the matter may be the better known and Inquired. 

In Testimony whereof wee have caused the Publick Seal of Our 
Province of the Massachusetts Bay aforesaid to be hereunto Affixed. 
Witness Joseph Dudley Esq- Captain General and Governour in 
Chief in and over Our s~- Province at Boston the Twenty fourth day 
of November. In the Second year of Our Reign annoq } Dili 1703. 

By Order of his Excellency the Governf by & 
with the Advice & Consent of y e Council 

Is A Addington. Secry. 

[Endorsed by Stephen Sewall, Clerk of the Courts] 
" Comission to hold ye Court 
of Oyer & Terminer. 1703." 

J Dudley. 


Mr. Goodell further stated that the extract from Las 
Casas's " History of the Indies" which appears in a footnote to 
Helps's " Life of Las Casas," p. 67, is not to be found at the 
place referred to in the edition of that History printed at 
Madrid in 1876. He also said that the manuscript copy of 
the History used by Prescott is not in the library of Harvard 
College, and asked if any member could inform him where he 
could find that copy. 1 

Mr. C. C. Smith being about to sail for Europe, it was voted 
that he be authorized to represent this Society on any fit occa- 
sion while he is abroad. 

Dr. Green mentioned that the account which he had given 
at a former meeting of the personal appearance of Peter 
Faneuil was confirmed by Sargent's " Dealings with the 
Dead," which states (vol. ii. p. 567) that " on one foot he 
wore a very high-heeled shoe." 

A serial number of the Proceedings from January to March 
inclusive was laid on the table by the Recording Secretary. 

It was voted that the meetings in July, August, and Septem- 
ber be omitted, unless a special meeting shall be called by the 
President and Secretary. 

1 Mr. Goodell has since ascertained that the Prescott copy was probably con- 
sumed in the great fire at Boston, in November, 1872. The passage quoted by 
Helps, which is given at greater length by Quintana, appears in book 3, chapter 
102, of the printed copy. Another similar passage quoted as from chapter 128 
of the same book, in manuscript, is in chapter 129 in the printed volumes. 



The Society resumed its meetings, which had been discon- 
tinued during the summer, on Thursday, the 9th instant ; the 
President, the Hon. Robert C. Winthrop, in the chair. 

The record of the last meeting was read by the Secretary 
and accepted. 

The Librarian's report of gifts to the Library was submitted ; 
and it included a regimental Order Book kept during the 
Revolution, which had been received from Dr. Charles E. 
Clark, of Boston. 

The President then said : — 

I trust, Gentlemen, that none of us are sorry that the time 
has arrived for resuming our regular meetings. It may even 
be hoped that the unaccustomed interval of three months will 
have given us all a fresh appetite for these historical confer- 
ences. There was something, certainly, of special good fortune 
in our having made that interval as long as it has been. The 
second Thursday of September, which we had included, almost 
for the first time, in our summer vacation, proved to be one of 
the most oppressive days of the season, ending in a startling 
storm of thunder and lightning, and giving us occasion for 
congratulation that there was no meeting here to call us away 
from our homes. I recall it the more vividly, as our worthy 
Vice-President, Dr. Ellis, had kindly driven out to see me at 
Brookline, where I had been confined by ill-health for many 
weeks, and we did not fail to remember the day. I may add 
that we agreed in thinking that it would be wise for the Soci- 
ety to make our vacation hereafter three months, instead of 
two months, as it generally has been in former years. 

During the interval which has elapsed since our June meet- 
ing, I have received several contributions to our Library or 
archives, which may be worthy of notice and acknowledg- 
ment. Our Corresponding Member, Mr. Henry Tuke Parker, 
has sent me a new and interesting Report of the British His- 
torical Manuscripts Commission, giving an account of a large 
collection of papers belonging to Mrs. Stopford Sackville, of 


Drayton House, Northamptonshire, most of which relate to 
our Revolutionary period, and throw some additional, if not 
entirely new, light on the views and conduct of the English 
Ministry and of the British generals connected with that 
period. It is amusing, to say the least, at this day, to find 
Eden, afterwards Sir William Eden, in a letter to Lord George 
Germain, written in behalf of Lord North, saying that " a 
worthy General [Gage] with parts inferior to his situation, 
and a corrupt Admiral [Howe ?] without any shadow of ca- 
pacity, have jointly contributed to increase the strength and 
numbers of the armed rebels in a very great degree, and to 
render the avowal of rebellion general over the whole Ameri- 
can continent." Nor is it less edifying to find Admiral Sir 
George Rodney telling Lord George, in 1780, that " he must 
not expect an end of the American War until he can find a 
general of active spirit, who hates the Americans from prin- 
ciple." There are also, in this report, some new letters of 
Count Rumford, the value of which may have been already 
ascertained by his biographer, Dr. Ellis, to whom I communi- 
cated the report without delay, and who will deposit it in our 
Library after he has sufficiently examined it. 

Mr. William T. R. Marvin has sent me the original auto- 
graph manuscript of a college exercise of Daniel Webster, 
dated 15 December, 1800, on the question, " Would it be 
advantageous to the United States to extend their Territo- 
ries?" It was given to Mr. Marvin's father, who was long 
the confidential printer of Mr. Webster, and the publisher of 
the original edition of Webster's works, — as I had the best 
reasons for knowing, — by Webster himself, who called it his 
44 first article on constitutional law." I have an indistinct 
impression that a copy of this little paper was received, and 
perhaps printed, by our Society some years ago. 1 But even 
if it were so, the autograph original is worthy of a place in 
our archives ; and I present it accordingly in the name of 
Mr. Marvin. 

Our accomplished Corresponding Member, Dr. George H. 
Moore, of New York, has sent me various little items of anti- 
quarian and historical interest from what he calls his " ancient 
memoranda," some of which, if not all, he thinks may have 

1 Vol. xi. p. 329. — Eds. 


escaped the notice of our local antiquarians. Here, first, is a 
list of the persons who kept carriages in Boston in 1768. The 
caption is in French, as follows : — 

" Noms des personnes qui tiennent carosse a Boston, 1768 : — 

Gov. Bernard. John Rowe. 

Andrew Oliver. John Hancock. 

Pitts. Dr. Gardner. 

Comraiss. Hubbard. William Vassal. 

Deacon Philips. Capt. Erving. 

Thomas Hutchinson. Dr. Clarke. 

James Bontineau. Dr. Bulfinch. 

John Apthorp. Dr. Lloyd. 

Widow Apthorp. Widow Green. 

Ebenezer Pemberton. Widow Storer. 

James Bowdoin. Mr. Flucker." 

Twenty-two in all. 

Here, next, is " a notice of an early attempt to provide for 
medical education in Massachusetts, showing that such a 
provision was a desideratum in Harvard College at the date, 
mentioned." Dr. Moore says : — 

" ' A Projection for Erecting a Bank of Credit in Boston, New Eng- 
land, Founded on Land Security, in 1714/ shows that the famous Land 
Bank Company, in their original project for starting the company, very 
shrewdly threw out, as an inducement to promote subscriptions, several 
benevolent propositions well calculated to stimulate the interest of the 
public-spirited friends of education. One of them was the following : 
* Two Hundred Pounds per annum to be paid to the Treasurer of Har- 
vard College in Cambridge for the Uses following : Viz. Twenty Pounds 
per annum for a Mathematical Professor residing there, &c. . . . Forty 
Pounds per annum for the Encouragement of Three Graduates Residing 
there until they take their Master's Degree, &c. . . . One Hundred 
Pounds per annum for the support of Six Ministers' Sons to be equally 
divided among them, &c. . . . Forty Pounds per annum to a Professor 
of Physick and Anatomy, Residing there, provided he read a Lecture 
once a Month on that subject. ' " 

Lastly, Dr. Moore adds a postscript to his communication as 
follows : — 

" With reference to Dr. Peabody's admirable vindication of Judge 
Pickering's memory, 1 Mr. Jefferson's own reference to him seems to 

1 Vol. xx. p. 333 ff. — Eds. 


have been forgotten, though it may have been the source of Mr. Ran- 
dall's inspiration and Mr. Morse's last utterance. Jefferson's words 
are : * In the impeachment of Judge Pickering, of New Hampshire, a 
habitual and maniac drunkard, no defence was made. Had there been, 
the party vote of more than one third of the Senate would have acquitted 
him.' " x 

It only remains for me, Gentlemen, to announce officially, 
for the record of our Proceedings, the death of a venerable 
associate, which none of us individually can have failed to 
notice at the time it occurred. 

The Hon. Stephen Salisbury died at his home in Wor- 
cester on the 24th of August last, at the advanced age of 
eighty-six years. He was elected a Resident Member of 
this Society in March, 1858, and had thus been one of our 
little number for more than a quarter of a century. He was 
a frequent attendant at our monthly meetings, in years 
past, notwithstanding the forty miles of travel — I should 
rather say the eighty miles of travel, coming and going — 
which such an attendance involved ; and he was always 
ready to co-operate with us in whatever might promote our 

But I need not say that he will be longest remembered in 
connection with associations and institutions in his native 
place. Born in Worcester, he never yielded to the attractions 
or distractions of larger places of residence. Throughout his 
protracted life he remained faithful to Worcester, doing all in 
his power, by the ample wealth which he had inherited and by 
his personal influence and enterprise, to build up that which 
was a little town of two thousand four hundred inhabitants at 
his birth, in 1798, to the importance which it now enjoys as a 
city of sixty or seventy thousand people, taking rank as the 
second city of Massachusetts in population, business, and 
wealth. As President of the old Worcester Bank for nearly 
forty years, and as President of the Worcester County Insti- 
tution for Savings for more than five-and-twenty years, and 
still more as one of the largest benefactors and most active 
friends of the admirable Free Institute of Industrial Science, 
his name will long be gratefully remembered in the heart of 
the Commonwealth. 

1 Randolph's Memoirs, vol. i. p. 69, note. 


But it was as President of the American Antiquarian Soci- 
ety, founded at Worcester by Isaiah Thomas in 1812, that he 
became known and respected far beyond any mere local range. 
He had held the chair of that distinguished institution for thirty 
years, and had spared nothing in the way of personal effort or 
pecuniary gift to promote its prosperity and honor. The 
Annual Meetings of the society at Worcester were occasions 
not easily to be forgotten by those who were privileged to 
partake of his generous hospitality and friendly entertainment. 
It is among my personal regrets, now that he is gone, - — as I 
annually wrote him while he lived, — that I was so rarely able 
to enjoy those attractive gatherings. Another such meeting 
is just at hand, when he will be sorely missed, and which will 
doubtless furnish the occasion for tributes to his memory, 
additional to those so justly paid at his funeral. 

Mr. Salisbury was a man of liberal education and varied 
acquirements, and his contributions to the Transactions of the 
Society over which he presided were numerous and interesting. 
Prepared for college at the old Leicester Academy, he was 
graduated at Harvard University in the notable class of 1817, 
which included among its members, George Bancroft, Caleb 
dishing, George B. Emerson, Samuel A. Eliot, Judge Charles 
H. Warren, Joseph Coolidge, Samuel E. Sewall, President 
Alva Woods, and Dr. Stephen H. Tyng, — and of which I may 
be pardoned for remembering that Francis William Winthrop 
took the very first honors, only to die two years afterwards, 
of consumption, at nineteen years of age. Mr. Salisbury 
was a warm and liberal friend of his Alma Mater, which con- 
ferred on him the degree of Doctor of Laws in 1875, and of 
which he was an Overseer for twelve years. He was also, 
for several years, a Representative for the town, and a Sena- 
tor for the county, of Worcester, successively, in our State 

I must not omit to mention that Mr. Salisbury was long 
associated with me as one of the few original Trustees of the 
Peabody Museum of American Archeology and Ethnology at 
Cambridge, and rendered faithful and valuable service as its 
Treasurer for fourteen or fifteen years. As lately as the 20th 
of June last, — only two months before his death, — he came 
down from Worcester, on a hot day, in his eighty-sixth year, 
to attend a visitation of that Museum. The physical weak- 


ness which he exhibited on that occasion fully prepared me for 
the fatal result which followed so soon afterwards. But he 
was unwilling to deny himself that last view of an institution 
in which he had been so deeply interested from its first organi- 
zation, and which he once told me was, in his judgment, the 
most satisfactorily and successfully administered institution 
with which he had ever been associated. 

I am authorized by the Council to submit the following 
Resolutions : — 

Resolved, That in the death of the Hon. Stephen Salisbury, 
LL.D., our Society has lost one of its most respected and 
venerable members, and that a Memoir of his long life and 
exemplary character be prepared for our Proceedings by the 
Hon. John D. Washburn. 

Resolved, That our Vice-President, Dr. Deane, be charged 
with communicating to the American Antiquarian Society, at 
their approaching Annual Meeting, an assurance of our sincere 
sympathy in their loss of a President who had served them so 
acceptably and efficiently for more than a third of a century, 
and whose devotion and munificence have so prominently 
identified him with their prosperity and welfare. 

The Resolutions were unanimously adopted. 

The resignation of Mr. Ellis Ames, in consequence of long- 
continued ill-health, was accepted. The resignation of Mr. 
William Gray was also accepted. 

Mr. Young then spoke as follows : — 

It was my duty, as Recording Secretary, a tew months ago 
to revise the list of members of this Society for the recently 
published volume of the Proceedings. On this list was the 
name of Major E. B. Jarvis, of the British Army, who was 
elected a Corresponding Member on the 27th of March, 
1845, with the title " Surveyor-General of India." No au- 
thentic information being obtainable in this country with 
regard to him, I wrote to the Hon. James Russell Lowell, 
our associate, and minister at the Court of St. James, to 
inquire if he could ascertain whether Major Jarvis was living 
or dead, and if he could procure any facts concerning him. 
In reply to this request I have received the following 
note : — 

1884.] REMARKS BY DR. GREEN. 229 

Legation of the United States, London, 
Rev. Edward J. Young. June 20 > 1884 ' 

Dear Sir, — I beg to acknowledge the reception of your letter of 
the 21st of April, and to say that I have received from the War Office 
in reference to the inquiry which I caused to be made there in your 
behalf : " I have had our official records carefully searched, and have 
also .made inquiries at the India Office, but am sorry to say that no trace 
can be found, either here or there, of the officer referred to as 'Major 
E. B. Jarvis/ in the letter you left with me. According to the informa- 
tion I have received from the India Office your correspondent is in error 
in supposing that ' Major Jarvis ' was Surveyor-General of India at the 
time named." 

Pray accept my thanks for the kind manner in which you refer to 
the academic honors which have been conferred upon me here, and 
believe me 

Faithfully yours, 

J. R. Lowell. 

Dr. Green made the following remarks : — 

At the meeting held on March 9, 1882, a letter was read 
from our Corresponding Member, George H. Moore, LL.D., of 
New York, which was subsequently printed in the Society's 
Proceedings (vol. xix. p. 250) of that date. It propounded 
an interesting medical question, and, besides, contained the 
following paragraph : — 

" In referring this topic to our associates in the Society, I am 
reminded also of my desire to know if any of the brethren can identify 
what must have been widely known in the early annals of New Eng- 
land as the ' Long March,' or the ' Hungry March.' I have met with 
references to it, and suppose it to have been as early as the Narragan- 
sett War, but should be glad to be instructed with authority on the 

Dr. Moore is right in referring this march to a period as 
early as the Narragansett War. An entry in the printed Jour- 
nal of the Massachusetts House of Representatives (page 70), 
Jan. 18, 1731, seems 'to fix its date beyond all doubt, and gives 
inferentially the reason for the name. It seems that Thomas 
Tilestone was one of a committee representing the Society of 
the Narragansett Soldiers, who, in consideration of their ser- 
vices during the war, petitioned the General Court for a grant 


of land. Their application was favorably considered by the 
House, and sent to the Council with a strong statement of the 
case, or " message," as it was called. It is there recorded 
that — 

" This House have thought it might tend to promote a good Under- 
standing and Harmony in this Court, to lay before the Honourable 
Board, wherefore it is, that the Representatives have come into the 
Grant of a Tract of six Miles square to each hundred and twenty Per- 
sons, which they have made this Session, in Answer to the Petition of 
Thomas Tilestone and others, a Committee in behalf of themselves and 
the rest of the Soldiers and their Descendants who were in the Narra- 
ganset War : And one great Reason is, that there was a Proclamation 
made to the Army in the Name of the Government, (as living Evidence 
very fully testify) when they were mustered on Dedham Plain, where 
they begun their March, That if they play'd the Man, took the Fort, and 
drove the Enemy out of the Narraganset Country, (which was their great 
Seat) that they should have a Gratuity in Land, beside their Wages : 
And it is well known, and our sitting to hear this Petition, is an Evi- 
dence that this was done ; and as the Condition has been performed, 
certainly the Promise in all Equity and Justice ought to be fulfilled : 
And if we consider the Difficulties those Brave Men went thro' in 
storming the Fort in the depth of Winter, and the pinching Wants they 
afterwards underwent in pursuing those Indians that escaped, through 
a hideous Wilderness, famously known throughout New-England to this 
Day, by the Name of, The Hungry March ; and if we further consider, 
that until this Brave tho' small Army thus play'd the Man, the whole 
Country was filled with Distress and Fear, and we trembled in this 
Capital Boston it self; and that to the goodness of God in this Army, 
we owe our Fathers and our own Safety and Estates, we cannot but 
think that those Instruments of our Deliverance and Safety ought to be 
not only justly, but also gratefully and generously Rewarded, and even 
with much more than they pray for, if we measure what they receive 
from us, by what we enjoy and have received from them." 

The message goes on further to state that these soldiers — 

" were not Vagabonds, Beggars and Outcasts, of* which Armies are 
sometimes considerably made up, who run the Hazards of War, to avoid 
the Danger of starving : So far from this, that these were some of the 
best of our Men, the Fathers and Sons of some of the greatest and best 
of our Families, and who could have no other View but to serve their 
Country, and whom God was pleas'd accordingly in a very remarkable 
manner to Honour and Succeed." 


It is evident from this description that these Narragansett 
soldiers represented the best social elements in the colony, and 
that they were fighting for their very existence. In this respect 
they remind us somewhat of the Union army dining the late 
Rebellion, which was made up largely of the most promising 
young men in the land. The parallelism is by no means lost 
when we learn that a Society of Narragansett Soldiers was 
formed in order to obtain land grants from the Government, 
for military services. 

I am tempted to note another fact found in this same Jour- 
nal of the House of Representatives (page 2), Dec. 2, 1731, 
relating to a popular phrase. It is commonly supposed that 
the expression Father of his Country was first used by us in 
connection with General Washington ; but it appears that Gov- 
ernor Belcher applied it to George II., before Washington was 
born. In an address to the Council and the House of Repre- 
sentatives, he says : — 

" As I abhor every thing that carries the Face of blind Obedience, so 
I do the least appearance of want of Duty to a Prince, who upon the 
highest Reason may challenge to be stiled, THE FATHER OF HIS 
COUNTRY. Thus happy is the whole English World, IN HIS 
PRESENT MAJESTY: I therefore hope, we shall all endeavour to 
make this People happy under the present Reign and Establishment." 

Mr. Hassam announced that a valuable manuscript had 
recently been discovered by Mr. Henry F. Waters in the 
British Museum. It was written about the year 1660 by 
Samuel Maverick, one of the first white men who ever settled 
on these shores, and it contains an account of all the towns 
east of the Hudson River, and gives a picture of what maj r be 
called the prehistoric state of New England. It consists of 
thirty foolscap pages, on which the lines are loosely written ; 
and although the name of the author is not given, it is ascer- 
tained by internal evidence. 

A Briefe Discription of New England and the Severall Townes therein, 
together with the Present Government thereof 1 

Pemaquid. — Westward from Penobscott (which is the Southermost 
Fort in Nova Scotia) fourteen Leagues of is Pemaquid in which River 
Alderman Alworth of Bristole, setled a Company of People in the 

1 Egerton MSS. 2395, ff. 397-411. 


yeare 1625, which Plantation hath continued and many Families are 
now settled there. There was a Patent granted for it by his Mat ies : 
Royall Grandfath er and by vertue of that Patent they hold the Islands 
of Monahegan and Damerells Coue, and other small ones adjacent 
Commodious for fishing. 

Sagadahocke. — Three leagues distant from Damerells Coue is Saga- 
dahocke at the mouth of Kenebeth River, on which place the Lord 
Pohams people setied about fiftie yeares since, but soon after deserted 
it, and returned for England ; I found Rootes and Garden hearbs and 
some old walles there, when I went first over which shewed it to be the 
place where they had been. This is a great and spreading River and 
runes very neer into Canada. One Captaine Young and 3 men with 
him in the Yeare 1636 went up the River upon discovery and only by 
Carying their Canoes some few times, and not farr by Land came into 
Canada River very neare Kebeck Fort where by the French, Cap* 
Young was taken, and carried for ffrance but his Company returned 
safe and about 10 yeares since a Gentleman and a Fryer came down 
this way from Kebeck to us in New England to desire aide from us 
ag st the Mo wake Indians who were and still are their deadly enemies ; 
This River by reason of its nearnesse to Canada and some other 
branches of it tending towards Hudsons River; and a Lake of Canada 
afford more Beaver skins and other peltry then any other about us : 
On this River & on the Islands lying on the mouth of it are many 
families Scatteringly setied. Some attend wholly the trade with the 
Indians, others planting and raiseing a stock of Cattle and Some at the 
mouth of the River keep fishing. There was a patent granted to 
Christo: Batchelo r and Company in the year 1632 or thereabouts for 
the mouth of the River and some tract of land adjacent, who came over 
in the Ship named the Plough, and termed themselves the Plough Com- 
panie, but soon scattered some for Virginia some for England, some to 
the Massachusetts never settling on that land. 

Oasco Bay. — Betweene Sagadahocke and Cape Elizabeth lying 
about 7 Leagues assunder is Casco Bay ; about the yeare 1 632 there 
was a Patent granted to one Cap*. Christopher Lewett for 6000 acres 
of land which he tooke up in this Bay neare Cape Elizabeth and built 
a good House and fortified well on an Island lyeing before Casco River 
this he sold and his Interrest in the Patent to M r Ceeley M r Jope and 
Company of Plimouth, In this Casco Bay are many scattering Families 
settled. There was a Patent granted for this Bay some yeares since by 
the title of the Province of Ligonia to Collonell Alexander Rigby after- 
wards a Judge, and under this Goverment the People lived some yeares, 
till of late the Government of the Massachusits hath made bold to 
stretch its Jurisdiction to the midle of this Bay, and as lyeing in their 
way have taken in a dozen of Goverments more. 


Richmond Island. — There was long since a Patent granted to M r 
Robert Trelawny of Plymouth from Cape Elizabeth to Spurwinke 
River including all Richmond Isle, an Excellent mshing place, His 
Agents for matter of Goverment long since submitted to the Province 
of Mayne, for which Province a Patent was long since granted to S r 
Ferdinando Gorges there are not many people in it, Those that are, 
are under the Goverment of the Massachusits. 

Black Point. — The next place inhabited is Black Point two miles 
from Richmond Island ; For this a Patent was granted to Captaine 
Cammock whose successor M r Henry Joselin lives there now, and sever- 
all Families besides, they were under the Goverment of the Province 
of Mayne, but now Commanded by the Massachusits. 

Saco. — Three miles beyond this is Saco River abounding with ffish 
as Basse, Sturgeon and Salmond. The Northside of the River was 
granted by Patent to M r Lewis and Capt. Bonithan, and the Southside 
to on M r Richard Vines, upon this River are severall Families setled 
formerly under the Goverment of the Province of Majne and here was 
keept some time the Generall Court for that Province, but now Com- 
manded by the Massachusits. 

Wells. — Three miles from Saco River are Cape Porpyes Islands 
a good flushing place, where are Severall Families setled, and 4 miles 
from thence is Wells a handsome and well peopled place Lying on both 
sides of a River, for which Place a Patent was long since Granted to on 
M r John Stratton but now Commanded by the Massachusetts. 

Bristoll now Yorke. — About 12 miles further is the River Agomen- 
tine, for which and the lands adjacent a Patent was (nere 30 yeares 
since) granted unto S r Ferdinando Gorges, M r Godfrey, Alderman 
ffoote of Bristoll my self e, and some others, On the northside of this 
River at our great Cost and Charges wee setled many ffamilies, which 
was then called Bristoll, and according to the Patent, the Goverment 
was conformable to that of the Corporation of Bristoll, only admitting 
of Appeal es to the Generall Court for the Province of Mayne which 
was often keept there, but some yeares since the Goverment with the 
rest was Swallowed up by the Massachusetts. 

Nichiquiwanick. — About 3 miles from Agomentine is the River 
Pascataway which is 6 miles from the mouth, It brancheth itselfe in 
two Branches, the South branch of which retaineth the name of Pas- 
cataway the other Nichiquiwanich, on the Northside of this River there 
are severall Divisions of Land granted long since by Patents unto 
diverse persons as Cap Mason, Cap* Griffith, M r Gardener and others, 
on which are severall persons setled for 12 miles togither. At the 
Falls of Nichiquiwanick 3 Excellent Saw-Mills are seatted and there 
and downward that side of y e River have been gotten most of the Masts 
which have come for England, and amongst the rest that admired Mast 



which came over some time last year containing neere 30 Tunes of 
Timber (as I have been informed). 

Cochequo. — On the Sowth side of that Branch is a Creeke Coche- 
quo, whereon at the head are 2 Saw Mills, and affoord good Masts, & 
Mutch Tarr hath been made on that Creeke side. 

Dover. — Belowe where the River parteth stands on a Tongue of 
Land the Towne of Dover, for which place and the land adjacent some 
gentlemen of or about Shrewsbury have a Patent. 

Oyster Creeke. — On the Northside of the South Arme is Oyster 
Creeke on which place are many people setled some Saw Mills and 
affoords yow Good Masts, and further up is another Saw Mill on 
Lamperell Creeke. 

Exeter. — Above this at the fall of this River Pascatoway is the 
Towne of Exceter, where are more Saw Mills, doune the Southside of 
this River are Farmes and other Stragling Families. 

Strawberry Bank. The Great House Sf Isle of SJtooles. — Within 
2 Myles of the Mouth is Strawberry Banke where are many Families, 
and a Minister & a Meeting House, and to the meeting Houses of 
Dower & Exceter, most of the people resort. This Strawberry Banke 
is part of 6000 acres granted by Patent about y e yeare 1620 or 1621, to 
M r David Thompson, who with the assistance of M r Nicholas Sherwill, 
M r Leonard Pomery and M r Abraham Colmer of Plymouth Merchants, 
went ower with a Considerable Company of Servants and built a Strong 
and Large House, enclosed it with a large and high Palizado and 
mounted Gunns, and being stored extraordinarly with shot and Ammu- 
nition was a Terror to the Indians, who at that time were insulting 
over the poor weake and unfurnished Planters of Plymouth. This 
house and ffort he built on a Point of Land at the very entrance of 
Pascatoway River, And haveing granted by Patent all the Island bor- 
dering on this land to the Midle of the River, he tooke possession of an 
Island comonly called the great Island and for the bounds of this land 
he went up the River to a point called Bloudy Point, and by the sea 
side about 4 milles he had also power of Goverment within his owne 
bounds, Notwithstanding all this, all is at this day in the power and 
at the disposall of the Massachusitts. Two Leagues of lyes the Isle of 
Shooles one of the best places for mshing in the land, they have built a 
Church here and maintaine a Minister. 

Hampton. — Eight Miles to the Southward of Pascatoway is a small 
River called Monoconock, on which River is a large Town called 
Hampton, The inhabitants living weell by Corne and Cattle, of which 
they have great store, Ther was a Patent granted for this very place 
to Cap* Mason neare 40 yeares agoe & this was the first land the Massa- 
chusits stretcht there line over beyond there true bounds : For about 3 
miles South of this place, at there first coming over they sett up a house 


and named it the bound House as finding it three miles from Meromack, 
the North bound of there Patent, and with this they rested contented 
for about 10 yeares. 

Salisbury New 8? Old. — Seaven Miles to the Southward of Hampton 
is Meromack River, on the mouth of which on the Northside is seatted 
a Large Toune called Sallisbury, and 3 miles above it a Village called 
old Salisbury, where ther is a Saw Mill or two. The Commodities 
this Toune affords are Corne, Cattle, Boards and Piper Staues. 

Haverell Andover. — Fouer Leagues up this River is Haverell, a 
pretty Toune & a few miles higher is the Toune of Andouer both these 
Tounes subsist by Husbandry. 

Newbury. — At the mouth on the southside of Meromack and upwards 
is seated the Towne of Newbury, the Houses stand at a good distance 
each from other a feild and Garden between each house, and so on 
both sides the street for 4 Miles or therabouts betweene Salisbury and 
this Towne, the River is broader then the Thames at Deptford, and in 
the Sumer abounds with Sturgeon, Salmon and other ffresh water fish. 
Had we the art of takeing and saveing the Sturgeon it would prove 
a very great advantage, the Country affording Vinager, and all other 
Materials to do it withall. 

In this Towne and old Newbury adjoining are 2 Meeting Houses. 

Rowley. — Three Miles beyound this Old Newbury is a large and 
populous Towne called Rowley about two miles from the Bay of Ago- 
wame within land the Inhabitants are most Yorkshiremen very laborious 
people and drive a pretty trade, raakeing Cloath and Ruggs of Cotton 
Wool, and also Sheeps wooll with which in few yeares the Countrey 
will abound not only to supply themselves but also to send abroad. 
This Towne aboundeth with Corne, and Cattle, and have a great number 
of Sheep. 

Ipswich. — • Three Miles beyond Rowley lyeth Ipswich at the head of 
Agawame River, as farr up as Vessel] s cane come. It hath many 
Inhabitants, and there farmes lye farr abroad, some of them severall 
miles from the Towne. So also they do about other Townes. 

Wenham. — Six Miles from this Towne lyeth a Towne called Wen- 
ham seated about a great Lake or Pond which abounds with all manner 
of ffresh ffish, and such comodities as other places have it aflfordeth. 

Gloucester. — - Between these two Townes there runes out into the 
Sea that noated head land called Cape Ann fower miles within the 
outermost head. There is a Passage cutt through a Marsh between 
Cape Ann Harbo r & Manisqwanne Harbour where stands the Towne 
called Glocester very comodious for building of shipping and ffishing. 

Manchester. — Fower miles Westward from Glocester, lyeth on the 
Sea side a small Towne called Manchester, there is a Sawmill and 
aboundance of Timber. 


Mackrell fy Basse Cove. — About six miles from this Towne lyeth by 
the Sea side a Village Called Mackarell Coue, and a mile or 2 aboue 
on a Branch of Salem River lyeth another Village called Basse Coue, 
These two have Joyned and built a Church, which stands between 
them both ower ag st Salem. 

Salem. — On the South side of Salem River stands on a peninsula 
the Towne of Salem, setled some yeares by a few people befor the 
Patent of the Massachusits was granted. It is very commodious for 
fishing, and many Vessells have been built there and (excep* Boston) 
it hath as much Trade as any place in New England both inland and 

Marblehead or Foy. — Two miles below this Towne on the Southside 
of the Harbo r by the sea side lyeth Marblehead or ffoy the greatest 
Towne for ffishing in New England. 

Lynne. — Five miles Westward lyeth the Towne of Lynne along by 
the sea side, and two miles aboue it within the bounds of it are the 
greatest Iron works erected for the most part at the charge of some 
Merchants, and Gentlmen here resideing and cost them about 14000£, 
who were as it is conceived about six yeares since Injuriously outted of 
them to the great prejudice of the Country and Owners. 

Reading. — Three miles above the Iron Worke in the Country is a 
pretty Towne, called Reading, which as all inland Townes doe live by 
Husbandry. The people have imployment also at the Iron work in 
digging of myne, and cutting of wood. 

Rumney Marsh. — Two miles from the Ironwork by the Sea side is 
a large Marsh called Rummney Marsh and between that and Winni- 
sime being about 2 miles, There are many good farmes belonging to 
Bostone, which have a Metting House, as it were a Chapel of Ease. 

Winnisime. — Two miles Sowth from Rumney Marsh on the North 
side of Mistick River is Winnisime which though but a few houses on 
it, yet deserves to be mencond One house yet standing there which 
is the Antientest house in the Massachusetts Goverment. a house which 
in the yeare 1625 I fortified with a Pillizado and fflankers and gunnes 
both belowe and above in them which awed the Indians who at that 
time had a mind to Cutt off the English, They once faced it but 
receiveing a repulse never attempted it more although (as now they 
confesse) they repented it when about 2 yeares after they saw so many 
English come over. 

Mauldon. — Two miles above Winnisime Westward stands a small 
Country Towne called Mauldon, who imploy themselves much in ffur- 
nishing the Towne of Boston and Charles Towne with wood, Timber 
and other Materials to build withall. 

Wooburne. — Fower or five miles above Mauldon West is a more 
considerable Towne called Wooburne, they live by ffurnishing the Sea 


Townes with Provisions as Corne and Flesh, and also they ffurnish the 
Merchants with such goods to be exported. 

Charles Towne. — One mile from Wlnnisime crossing Mistick River 
is the Towne of Charles Towne standing on the Northside of the Mouth 
of Charles River, It Challengeth the second place of Antiquitie in the 
Massachusetts Government. It hath some considerable Merchants in 
it and many usefull handicraftsmen and many good farmers belonging 
to it. 

Cambridge. — Three miles aboue this stands on the same River the 
Towne of Cambridge in which there is a Colledge a Master and some 
Number of Students belonging to it ; out of which there have come 
many into England, The Towne hath many great ffarnies belonging 
to it. 

Water Towne. — Joyning to this is Watter Towne, a great Towne 
reaching by y e River Side two miles, and hath belonging to it very 
many and great ffarmes, about the uper end of this Towne are the ffalls 
of Charles River. 

Concord. — Above Twelve miles above Watter Towne is an In-land 
Towne called Concord It lyeth on the River Meromack I conceive 
about 20 miles above the first ffalls but good passing on it there in 
small Boats from place to place. They subsist in Husbandry and 
breeding of Catle. 

Sudbury. — • About 4 or 5 Miles more Southerly on the same River 
is a Towne called Sudbury a very pleasant place, the River runing to 
& againe in it, In which I have seen Excellent ffishing both with hooks 
& Lynes and Netts, They plant and breed Catle, and gett something 
by Tradeing w* the Indians. 

Nashoway. — About ten or twelfe miles aboue these Two Townes is 
a Countrey Towne called Nashoway first begun for Love of the Indians 
Trade, but since the fertility of y e Soyle and pleasantness of the River 
hath invited many more. There is Excellent Salmon and Trout. 

Now we must returne to the mouth of Charles River againe or rather 
the entrance of the Bay of Massachusits, It hath three entrances, two 
of them difficult and dangerous without a good wind and Pylot. The 
Southermost called Nasascot in the usuall Channell ; w*in this Bay are 
12 or 13 pretty Islands between some of which yow must saile about 2 
leagues before yow come up to Boston Rode yow must passe within 
halfe a Cable lenth of Castle Island, on which is a ffort above and a 
strong Battery below, closs by Highwater marke. on this Island I 
conceive there be thirtie good Gunns. 

Boston. — Two miles aboue this Island is the Towne of Boston, the 
Metrapolis of New England lying pleasantly on a plaine and. the ascend- 
ing of a High Mount which lyes about the midle of y e plaine, The 
wholl Towne is an Island except two Hundred paces of land at one 


place on the Southside it is large and very populous. It hath two hand- 
some Churches in it, a handsome market place, and in the midest of it 
a Statehouse. In the Towne are fouer full companys of ffoote and a 
Troope of horse On the Southeast side of the Towne on a little Hill 
there is a Fort, and under it a Batterie both having a dozen of Gunns 
or more in them, and on the Northeast side of the Towne there is a 
Battery of 6 Gunns commanding the Rode and the entrance of Charles 
River, and on the tope of the Hill aboue the Towne and in the strats 
are severall good Gunns, The Towne is full of good shopps well fur- 
nished with all kind of Merchandize and many Artificers, and Trad's 
men of all sorts. In this Towne are kept the Courts of Election y e 
Generall quarter Court besids the Country Courts. 

Roxberry. — About two miles to the Southward of Boston is the 
Towne of Roxberry. The sea which surrounds Boston comes on both 
sides of it. It is well seatted, for the Body of the Towne lyeth on both 
sides a small Rivolet of water. There are many considerable ffarmes 
belonging to it, and by Farmeing is there most subsistance. 

Dorchester. — Two miles near east from this Towne lyeth Dorches- 
ter, which claimes the third dignity as being y e third Towne setled by 
the English in the year 1630. They are a very industrious people, and 
have large bounds on w ch are many gallant Farmes, by these bounds 
runes the Massachusets River. 

Dedham. — And on Charles River stands the Towne of Dedham 
about 8 Miles either from Boston or Roxberry, a very pleasant place 
and the River affoords plenty of good ffish In this Towne leiveth 
many Bisquett makers and Butchers and have Vent enough for their 
Commodities in Boston. 

Medfeild. — Five or six Miles from Dedham is a small in-land Towne 
called Medifield handsomly seatted for Farming and breeding of 

Braintree. — Three or fouer miles Southward is a Towne once called 
Mount Wolaston, now Braintree. There was a Patent granted for a 
considerable tract of land in this place in the yeare 1632 or thereabouts 
to Cap* Wollaston and M r Thomas Morton. Wollaston returned for 
England and Morton was banished, his house fired before his face, and 
he sent prissoner to England but for what offence I know not who some 
yeares after (nothing being laid to his Charge) returned for New Eng- 
land, where he was soon after apprehended and keept in the Comon 
Goale a whole winter, nothing laid to his Charge but the writeing of a 
Booke entituled New Canaan, which indeed was the truest discription 
of New England as then it was that euer I saw, The offence was he 
had touched them too neare they not proveing the charge he was sett 
loose, but soone after dyed, haveing as he said and most believed re- 
ceived his bane by hard lodging and fare in prison. This was done by 


y e Massachusetts Magistrats and the land by them disposed of. It 
subsists by raiseing provisions, and furnishing Boston with wood. 

Weymouth. — Two or three miles from hence Sowthward is y e Towne 
of Weymouth, wherein are some quantity of Inhabitants, & leive as 
their neibo™ who have commerce with Boston. 

Higham. — Three Miles from hence Easterly on the South shoare 
of Massachusits Bay is the Towne of Higham a handsome Towne 
supplying Boston also with wood, timber, leather and board, Some 
Masts are had there and store of provisions. 

Hull. — Three Miles further tending more to the East, at the very 
entrance into the Massachusetts Bay is the Towne of Hull, the Inhab- 
itants of which leives well being by Water not above 7 Miles from 
Boston tho neare 20 by land. 

Three miles South from this place is the utmost south bounds of the 
Massachusits Goverment and Territories, beyond which they have not 
gone although they have gone soe farr beyond them to the Northward. 
Before I enter into Plymouth bounds I must say some- , 
thing of this Goverment which hath ouertopped all the 

About the yeare 1626 or 1627 there was a Patent granted by his 
Maty 63 : Roy all Father of ever blessed Memory to certaine Gentlemen 
and Merchants, for the Tract of land befor mencond, and power given 
them by the same to incorporate themselfes into a body pollitick the 
Governor and all other officers to be Annually chosen by the Majo r part 
of the inhabitants, fTVeholders, As soon as the grant was confirmed, 
they chose here on M r Mathew Craddock Governo r and one Goffe dep- 
uty ; They forthwith sent over one M r Endicott, Governor * as deputy 
to rule over us the Inhabitants which had leived there long befor their 
Patent was granted, and some had Patents preceeding theirs, had he 
had pouer according to his will he had ruled us to y e purpose ; But 
within two yeares after they sent ower one M r John Winthrope Gov- 
ernor and with him a Company of Assistants all Chosen here in Eng- 
land without the Knowledge or Consent of them that then leived there 
or of those which came with them. 

This Governo r and his Councill, not long after their Aryvall made a 
law that no man should be admitted a Freeman, and soe Consequently 
have any voyce in Election of Officers Civill or Military, but such as 
were first entered into Church covenant and brought Certificate of it, 
let there Estates, and accordingly there portion of land be never soe 
great, and there taxes towards publick Charges. Nor could any com- 
petency of Knowledge or inoffensivenesse of liveing or conversation 
usher a man into there Church {fellowship, unless he would also 

1 This word " Governor" was interlined over the word "as/" and unfortu- 
nately no caret mark made to show its intended place. 


acknowledge the discipline of the Church of England to be erroneous 
and to renounce it, which very many never condescended unto, so that 
on this account the far great Number of his Majesties loyall subjects 
there never injoyed those priviledges intended by his Royall ffather in 
his Grant, And upon this very accompt also, if not being Joyned in 
Church ffelowship many Thowzands have been debarred the Sacrament 
of the Lords Supper although of Competent knowledg, and of honest 
life and Godly Conversation, and a very great Number are unbaptized 
I know some neer 30 years old, 7 persons of Quality about 12 years 
since for petitioning for themselves & Neighbo rs that they might have 
votes in Elections as ffreeholders or be ffreed from publick Charge, and 
be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and theire Children 
to Baptisme as Members of the Church of England, and have liberty 
to have Ministers among themselves learned pious and Orthodox, no 
way dissonant from ye best Reformation in England, and desireing alsoe 
to have a body of Lawes to be Established and published to prevent 
Arbitrary Tiranny, For thus desireing these three reasonable requests 
besids imprissonement and other indignitys, they were fined 1000 11 , a 
Notw^tanding they Appealled to England, they were forced to pay the 
same, and now also at great Charges to send one home to prosecute 
their appeall which proved to no Effect, That dismall Change falling 
out, Just at that time And they sending home hither one Edward 
Winslow a Smooth toungued Cunning fellow, who soon gott himselfe 
into Favo r of those then in Supreame power, against whom it was in 
vaine to strive, and soe they remained sufferers to this day. 

By what I have said it appears how the Major part of the Inhabi- 
tants are debarred of those Priviledges they ought to enjoy and were 
intended fo r them, How they Esteem of the Church of England. How 
farr they owne his Matie as haveing any power over them, or their 
Subjection to him; This I know that not long after they arrived they 
defaced the Collou rs which they brought over with them, being the 
English Redd Cross terming it a badge of the Whore of Babelon. 

And not long after haveing received a Report that his Mat ie intended 
to send a Generall Governo r over, and being informed by a Shallop 
that they had seen a great shipe and a smaller one goe into Cape Ann 
Harbo r about 8 Leagues from Boston There was an Alarme presently 
given and early in the Morning being Sabbath day all the Traine Bands 
in Boston, and Townes adjacent were in Armes in the streets and posts 
were sent to all other places to be in the same posture, in which they 
continued untill by theire scouts they found her to be a small shipe of 
Plymouth and a shallope that piloted her in, The generall and Publick 
report was that it was to oppose the landing of an Enemie a Governo r 
sent from England, and with this they acquainted the Commanders. 

And about the year 1636 one Brooks hearing one Evers to vilifie the 


Goverment of England both Civill and Eclcsiasticall, and saying that 
if a Generall Governo 1 " were sent over he would kill him if lie could, 
and he knew the Magistrats would bear him out in it, of which Brooks 
complaining by way of Information, the matter was handled that Evers 
had nothing said to him, and Brookes forced to escape privatly for 

They also in the yeare 1646 & 1647 suffered a ship the Mary of Bris- 
toll then standing out for the Kings Majestie to be taken by one Stagg 
haveing a Commission from the Parliament, and conveyed away although 
they had promised them a protection. They also Ordered the takeing 
downe of the Kings Armes and setting up the States, & the like, by the 
Signe of the Kings head hanging before the doore of an Inne. And 
when that unhappy warr was between King and Parlia* they compelled 
every Commander of a Vessell that went out from thence to enter into 
Bond not to have any Commerce with any place then holding out for 
the King, and in opposition to the then pretended power in England, 
Nor was there ever any Oath of Alleageance offered to any, but instead 
thereof they have framed two Oathes, which they impose on those 
which are made free. The other they terme the Oath of ffidelitie, 
which they farce all to take that are above 16 yeares of age, a Coppy of 
it is as followeth — 

I. A. B. by Gods providence being an Inhabitant within the Juris- 
diction of this Comon Wealth doe freely and sincerely acknowledge 
myselfe to be subject to the Goverment thereof. I doe hereby swear 
by the great and dreadfull name of the ever liveing God, that I will be 
true and Faithfull to the same, and will accordingly yeild assistance 
thereunto with my person, Estate, as in equity I am bound And will 
also truly endeavo r to maintaine and preserve all the Liberties and 
priviledges thereof, Submitting myselfe unto the wholesome Lawes 
made and established by the same. And further that I will not plot or 
practize any evill against it or consent to any that shall soe doe But 
will timely discover and reveall the same to Lawfull Authority now 
here established for the speedy preventing thereof. So Help me God 
in Our Lord Jesus Christ. 

By this it may be judged what esteeme they have of the lawes of 
England, swearing theire subjects to submite to lawes made only by 
themselfes, And indeed to Alleage a Statute Law of England in one 
of their Courts would be a ridiculous thing, They likewise long since 
fell to coyning of monies, melting downe all the English Coyne they 
can gett, every shilling makeing 15 d in their monies, And whereas they 
went over thither to injoy liberty of Conscience, in how high a meas- 
ure have they denyed it to others there wittnesse theire debarring many 
from the Sacraments spoken of before meerly because they cannot Joyne 
with them in their Church-ffellowship, nor will they permitt any Law- 



full Ministers that are or would come thither to administer them. 
Wittness also the Banishing so many to leave their habitations there, 
and seek places abroad elswhere, meerly for differing in Judgment from 
them as the Hutchinsons and severall families with them. & that Honb le 
Lady the Lady Deborah Moody and severalls with her meerly for 
declareing themselfes moderate Anabaptists, Who found more favour 
and respect amongst the Dutch, then she did amongst the English, 
Many others also upon the same account needless to be named, And 
how many for not comeing to theire assemblies have been compelled to 
pay 5 s a peece for every Sabbath day they misse, besides what they are 
forced to pay towards the mantenance of the Ministers, And very 
cruelly handled by whipping and imprissonment'was M r Clark, Obadiah, 
Holmes, and others for teaching and praying in a private house on the 
Lords day, These and many other such like proceedings, which would 
by them have been judged Cruelty had they been inflicted on them 
here, have they used towards others there ; And for hanging the three 
Quakers last yeare I think few approved of it. 

There are or will come unto the Hon ble Councell many Complaints 
against them, I shall say no more but come to 

The Discription of Plymouth bounds. 

Connahassett. — It begins where the Massachusets ends. Three miles 
to the Southward of the Massachusets Bay, where (neere by y e sea side) 
there stands a Village called Connahasset eight miles further there is a 
small River comes out, and a reasonable harbour at the mouth of it. 

Scytuate. — On both sides is a Towne called Scytuate. 
Greenes-harbour. — From Scituate by ye sea side is a considerable 
Town called Greens Harbour, a Towne well meadowed & good farmes 
belonging to it. It is 7 miles from Scytuate. 

Ducksbury. — Seauen or eight miles from this Towne is Ducksbury 
which is also a good plantation and affords much provision, which they 
sell at Boston for the most part. 

New Plymouth. — Three or Fower miles Southward of this is ye 
Towne of New Plymouth whence the Goverment took its Denomination 
This place was seated about y e yeare 1620 or 1621 by a company of 
Brownists, which went formerly from England to Amsterdam, and not 
beeing able to live well there, they drew in one M r Weston, and some 
other Merchants in London to Transport them and their Famelies into 
those Westerne parts ; They intended for Virginia, but fell with Cape 
Cod als Mallabar, and gott into the Harbour of it, and finding it. not fitt 
for Habitation, sought further and found this place and there settled 
Hveing extream hardy for some yeares and in great danger of the Indi- 
ans, and could not Long have subsisted, had not Plymouth Merchants 
Fettled Plantations about that time at Monhegon and Pascattaway, by 
whom they were supplyed and the Indians discouraged from assaulting 


them It is a poor small Towne now, The People being removed into 
Farmes in the Country. 

Sandwich. — Eighteene Miles more Southerly from Plymouth is a 
good Towne called Sandwich a Towne which affords good store of Pro- 
visions, and some yeares a quantity of Whalebone made of Whales which 
drive up dead in that Bay. 

Barnstable. — Twelve Miles from Sandwich is Barnstable a Towne 
much like it and affords the same Comodities. 

Yarmouth. — Seaven miles from Barnstable south east is the Towne 
of Yarmouth, much like the former, and had in it as the rest have good 
farmes about it, and sometimes also good benefite by drift W T hales. 

Billingsgate. — Six miles east of this Towne is Billingsgate which 
lyes in y e Southeast nooke of Cape Codd Bay,' and from thence to the 
Sea on the South side of the s d Cape, it is a very litle way whereas to 
goe about is neare 20 Leagues which in tim will make it more con- 
venient for Trade. 

Almost South some what Westerly from Billingsgate is Natuckett 
Island on which many Indians live and about ten leagues west from it 
is Martines Vinyard, whereon many Indians live, and also English. 
In this Island by Gods blissing on the Labour, care and paines of the 
two Mayhews, father and sonn, the Indians are more civilized then 
anywhere else which is a step to Christianity, and many of them 
have attained to a greate measure of knowledge, and is hoped in a 
short time some of them may with joy & Comfort be received into the 
Bossome of the Church, The younger of those Mayhews was drowned 
comeing for England three yeares since, and the Father goes on with 
the worke, Although (as I understand) they have had a small share 
of those vast sufues given for this use and purpose of y e Revenues 
of it It were good to enquire how it hath been disposed of I know 
in some measure or at least suspect the bussines hath not been rightly 
carry ed. 

Rhode Island. — From this Island to Rhode Island is about Seaven 
Leagues west, This Island is about ffouerteen miles Long, in some 
places 3 or 4 miles Broad, in other lesse. It is full of people haveing 
been a receptacle for people of severall Sorts and Opinions. 

Warwick Providence. — There was a Patent granted to one Codding- 
ton for the Goverment of this Island, and Warwick and Providence two 
Townes which lye on the maine, And I think they still keepe a seem- 
ing forme of Goverment but to litle purpose, none submitting to Supream 
Authority but as they please. 

Rehobah. — Some three miles above Providence on the same River, 
is a Towne called Rehobah, and is under the Goverment of New Ply- 
mouth, a Towne not dispicable. It is not aboue 40 Miles from Boston, 
betweene which there is a Comone trade, carrying & recarrying goods 


by land in Cart and on Horseback, and they have a very fayre convey- 
ance of goods by water also. 

Taunton. — About ten miles from this eastward is Taunton lying on 
another River within Rhode Island about 20 Miles up, It is a pleasant 
place, seated amongst the Windings and turnings of a handsome River, 
and hath good conveyance to Boston by Cart not being above 30 Miles 
assunder, here is a pretty small Iron-worke, & is under New Plymouth 

Pequate. — Haveing gone through New Plymouth Goverment we 
come next to Connecticot Goverment. The first that was under this 
Goverment was Pequate, betweene w ch and Rhods Island it is above 18 

In the faire Narragansitt Bay, and diverse fine Islands 

Fishers Island. — Before the Pequate River lyes Fishers Island, on 
which some people live, and there are store of Catle. This Pequat 
Plantation will in time produce Iron, And in the country about this is 
a Myne of Black Lead, and supposed there will be found better if not 
already by y e industry of that ingenious Gentleman M r John Winthrop. 
It hath a very good Harbour, farr Surpassing all there about Connecti- 
cot River mouth to Pequate it is about eight Leagues. 

Saybrooke. — Ou the South-west side of the entrance of this River 
stands Saybrooke and Saybrooke Fort, a handsome place and some 
Gunns in the Fort. 

Metaboseck. — Fifteene Leagues up the River on the same side is the 
Plantation of Metaboseck, a very good place for Corne and Catle. 

Witherfeild. — From Metaboseck to Withersfeild a large & Populous 
Towne, it is about 9 miles. 

Hartford. — From Withersfield to Hartford the Metropolis of the 
Goverment, it is about 3 Miles, it is a gallant Towne, and many rich 
men in it 

Windsor. — From Hartford to Windsor 9 Miles, this was the first 
Towne on this River, settled first by people issueing from Dorchester 
in the Massachusetts Bay about the year 1636 

Springfeild. — From Windsor to Springfield about 12 miles, and the 
first falles on Connecticot River are betweene these two Townes, This 
is the Massachusetts bounds. 

And above Springfeild 8 Miles is another Towne at first Intended 
but for a tradeing house with the Indians, but the gallant Land about it 
hath invited men to make it a Toune This Connecticott River is a 
great River before y e Towne bigger then the Thames above bridge, 
This Towne is also in the Massachusetts bounds and under its Gover- 
ment although 8 Miles from it 

Guilford. — Now we must returne to the Mouth of the River and so 
along by the sea side; and first from Saybrooke to Guilford 12 Miles. 


Tocott. — From Guilford to Tocott 9 Miles. These two Townes are 
under Newhaven Goverment 

Newhaven. — From Tocott to Newhaven it is 7 Miles. This Towne 
is the Metropolis of that Goverment, and the Goverment tooke its 
Name from this Towne ; which was the first built in those parts, many 
stately and costly houses were erected the Streete layd out in a Gallant 
forme, a very stately Church ; but y e Harbour proveing not Como- 
dious, the land very barren, the Merchants either dead or come away, 
the rest gotten to their Farmes, The Towne is not so glorious as once 
it was. 

Milford. ■ — From Newhaven to Milford it is about 10 Miles, This 
Towne is gotten into some way of Tradeing to Newfoundland, Barbados, 
Virginia, So also hath some other Townes in this Goverment 
Now in Course comes in againe some 
Townes in Connecticott Goverment 

Stratford. — From Milford to Stratford about 4 Miles 

Fairfeild. — From Stratford to Fairfeild about 8 Miles 

Norwock. — From ffairfeild to Norwock about 14 Miles and this 
Towne with those last named are in Connecticott Goverment. I sup- 
pose this skipped over Newhaven, being they came from those Townes 
in Connecticott River. 

Stamford. — From Norwock to Stamford 8 Miles 

Greewich. — From Stamford to Greenwich miles, these two last 
Townes are under Newhaven Goverment, and there was another place 
begunn and much done in it, but the Dutch came and tooke it by force, 
and since the people of this Towne call it New Chester, 

There are some Townes on Long Island which have come some under 
the Goverment of Connecticot, and some of Newhaven ; We are now 
come about 25 Miles within the Dutch plantation, which before I speake 
of I shall runn over ye plantations on Long Island, and shew under 
what Goverment they are begining at the west end. The Island con- 
teanes in Lenth about 150 Miles, and lyes not farr from the Mayne, 
especialy at the west end where it is very narrow, The plantationes 
are all on the inside, the Sea board syde being a dangerous Coast and 
no Harbour at all on that syde. 

Within a few Miles of the West end over against Manhata, which is 
the Dutch's Chiefe Towne is seated Gravesend, most English, the Lady 
Moody being the first Setler, Some Dutch there are, and all under the 
Dutch Goverment. 

Then Mispach kell 

Then Midleburgh als New Towne 

Then Vlishinsr 

Then Hempsteed 

Then another Towne by the Dutch name _ 

These Townes are 
y under y e Dutch 



Then follow to the Northward 

First Oyster Bay under Newhaven Government 

Huntington not submitting to any Goverment ] ™, rri 

m c . * tm o u •/• These lownes 

lhen hotocot Likewayes submitting to none I , . 

Nex* Southampton under Newhaven Goverment ' » f r u 

Nex* South-hole also under Newhaven J 

Then crossing a Bay but 12 Miles (but to round it, it is much more) 
is Northampton. This Towne is under Connecticott Goverment. And 
then Easthampton under no Goverment 

I suppose these two Governments of Connecticott, and Newhaven, are 
only by Combination, I never heard of any Patent they have, and 
they are also in Confederate with the Massachusetts, and New Ply- 
mouth, each of these 4 Goverments annually choosen two Comissioners 
to meet and Consult as occasion may serve ; their power lasting for one 
yeare. These meettings prove chargeable, and as it is conceived of 
many of no great use. 

Tis well knowen the Dutch plantation had been taken by those two 
Southerne Collonies helpe, and the English on Long Island when 
Majo r Sedgwick was sent to take it who putting back for Fyall news 
came by one of his Fleet that his designe was for that place ; These 
afforsaid Comissioners mett at Boston, where some weeks were spent in 
Contest betweene the Commissioners of the two Southerne and North- 
ern Collonies. Those of the South Colonies were for proceeding with 
expedition on the designe, The Comissioners of the North were dayly 
crying out for Orders or leave to goe on. But those of Plymouth 
being Mungrell Dutch, and some of the Grandees amongst them have- 
ing a sweet trade with the Dutch or debts oweing to them, from them ; 
And those of the Massachusetts haveing some other by-reason for it so 
long held out the dispute till it was to late the peace being concluded. 

There lye between this Long Island and the Mayne severall Islands, 
the most Considerable is Shelter-Island, about 8 miles in lenth and three 
in breadth, This belongs to Collonell Thomas Midleton and M r Sil- 
vester, on which they have some people & store of Catle. 

Another considerable Island lyes by it of about 6 Miles in Lenth, and 
three in Breadth. 

Now before I come to speak of Hudsons River, I shall most humbly 
desire the Hon ble Councill to take it in consideration the great benefits 
and profitts, which may redound to the English by these Westerne 
Colonies if well managed. Of their present condition I have given a 
breife accompt in my foregoing Relation, being my observations which 
for severall years I have spent in America, even from the year 1624 
till within these two yeares last past: 

For Newfoundland, it is well known what a great Number of Shipps 
and Seamen have been there imployed annually I dare averr it hath 


bredd more Seamen then any Trade the English ever medled withall 
& what profitts the Owners and Merchants have gott by that Trade is 
unvaluable, And if a course were taken we might now have salt from 
the English Collonies in the West Indies, and provision from New 
England to carry on a greatt part of the designe, and on better termes 
then out of Europe. 

On all the Coasts of Canada from Cape Britton to Cape Sable is 
Excellent fishing and full of good Harbours 

On the Coast within Cape Sable, as in Nova Scotia, Port Royall, and 
those other fforts now in possession of Collonel Temple is mutch Beaver 
& other Peltry gotten, and more might be if fully Stocked 

And for the Southern part of New-England, It is incredible what 
hath been done there 

In the yeare 1626 or thereabouts there was not a Neat Beast Horse 
or sheepe in the Countrey and a very few Goats or hoggs, and now it 
is a wonder to see the great herds of Catle belonging to every Towne 
I have mentioned, The braue Flocks of sheepe, The great number of 
Horses besides those many sent to Barbados and the other Carribe 
Islands, And withall to consider how many thousand Neate Beasts 
and Hoggs are yearly killed, and soe have been for many yeares past 
for Provision in the Countrey and sent abroad to supply Newfoundland, 
Barbados, Jamaica, @ other places, As also to victuall in whole or in 
part most shipes which comes there. 

Betweene the years 1626 and 1633, Indian Corne was usually sold 
at 10 s or 12 s the Bushell, now not esteemed worth 2 s . Beefe and Porke 
then Brought from England and Irland sold at excessive rates. 

At that time all the Houses there, except three or fower at New 
Plymouth, and those which I had could not be valued worth 200 lb , and 
now to behold the handsome Houses & Churches in so many Townes 
as I have named is a wonder, And the place in which Boston (the 
Metropolis) is seated, I knew then for some yeares to be a Swamp and 
Pound, now a great Towne, two Churches, a Gallant Statehouse & 
more to make it compleate, then can be expected in a place so late a 

And wheras about the time before mentioned wee could not make in 
all three Hundred men in the whole Countrey, those scattered a hun- 
dred and fnftie Miles assunder, Now almost every Towne which I 
have named is able to bring into the feild a full Company of Foote and 
some Horse, some Townes two or three Companyes compleate with 
Horse proportionable and Boston more 

And the great abundance of English Fruite, as Apples, Pears, Apri- 
cocks, Plumbs, Cherries Musk-Mellons, Water-Mellons &c. is not to be 
beleeved but by those that have seene it 

And about those times also there were not within the now Great 



Government of the Massachusetts above three Shallops and a few 
Cannoes, Now it is wonderfull to see the many Vessels belonging to 
the Country of all soils and seizes, from Shipps of some reasonable 
burthen to SkifFes and Cannoes, many other great Shipps of Burthen 
from 350 Tunns to 150 have been built there, and many more in time 
may be, And I am confident there hath not in any place out of so 
small a number of People been raised so many able Seamen and Com- 
manders as there hath been. 

Now we return e to Hudson s River, in the mouth of which lyeth y e 
Island Mahatas, on which stands now Amsterdam in the Latitude of 41 
degrees and about 41 Leagues up the River is their Fort Orauja in the 
Latitude of 42 & J or thereabouts 

I have alwayes understood that the first Setlement of the Dutch there 
was about the yeare 1618, @ were then a very considerable Number, 
and long after. And this was as I conceive some yeares after King 
James had granted all the lands and Islands betweene the Latitude of 
40 degrees to 48 North Latitude, unto a Company established at Ply- 
mouth in Devon then nameing it New-England, so that Mahatas lyes a 
full degree within y e bounds of New England ; and Fort Oranja their 
prin 1 place both for Trade with the Indians @ for Husbandry it lyeth 
two full degrees and an halfe within the bounds of New England 

And about the year 1629 or 1630 Theire Title to it being in question 
a rich ship comeing from thence was seized on at Plymouth, as some 
now here can testify, which shipp and goods (as they say) was deliv- 
ered up on the Dutch relinquishment of any Title they had or might 
have to the said Hudsones River And this seemes to be true, for in or 
about the year 1632 or 1634, a shipp set out from hence by M r Clo- 
bery & Dellabar and others for New England, with passengers & goods 
& had also a Commission from his Mat ies : Royall Father to saile unto 
Mahatas @ as farr up into the River towards Fort Oranja as they could 
goe, and there trade with the Natives ; which they did without any 
opposition, as the Masters yet liveing can testifie 

From the uttermost part of Hudsons River to the North Cape of 
Delaware Bay, is somewhat above 20 leagues, and from this Cape to 
the entrance of the River is about 12 Leagues. 

Here the Sweedes some yeares since built a Fort and five Leauges 
above that a Sconce, and three Leagues above that another Fort, and 2 
Leagues above that another. 

And hereabout the River trends away so much easterly that betweene 
that @ Hudsons River it is not above 30 Miles. In this River hath 
been seated some English Familes, but outed by the Dutch or Swedes. 

For this place there was some yeares since a Patent granted to S r 
Edmund Ploydon, but by whom I know not, nor what is become of him 
or his Patent. 

1884.] price's view oe BOSTON. 249 

The entrance of this River is in 40 degrees And now I am come to 
the utmost Southwest bounds of New England which is a Country 
wherein the Rivers and Pounds affords variety of Fish and Beaver 
in Great abundance, The earth brings forth plentifully all sorts of 
Graynes, also Hemp @ fflax, The Woods affords store of good Timber 
for building of shipps Masts, Also Pitch and Tarre, The bowels of 
the earth yeilds excellent Iron Oare, and no doubt other Metalls if 
searched after. 1 

After finishing the reading of this paper, Mr. Hassam spoke 
of the great value of the labors of Mr. Waters; whereupon 
a committee, consisting of Messrs. Lee, Hassam, and Haynes, 
was appointed to consider what could be done to facilitate 
his researches. 

Mr. C. C. Smith said : — 

While I was in London, a few weeks ago, I received from our 
associate, Mr. Winsor, a letter making some inquiries about a 
view of Boston in the British Museum, 2 A very cursory ex- 
amination was sufficient to show that this was Price's well- 
known view, but in an earlier state of the plate than the copy 
belonging to this Society, or the copy in the library of the 
Antiquarian Society at Worcester. It fully confirmed the 
suggestion made b}^ Mr. Winsor at our May meeting in 1880, 
that the view published in 1743 was a re-issue of an old 
engraving. In the Museum copy there is a dedication " To 
the Honble. Saml. Shute, Esqr., Capt. General & Govr. in Chief 
of His Majty's Provinces of the Massachusetts Bay & New 
Hampshire in New England, and Vice Admiral of the Same," 
signed by Thomas Selby and William Price. The copies 
heretofore known are dedicated to Peter Faneuil, and only 
the name of Price is subscribed to the dedication. It is evi- 
dent that the Museum copy is one of the earliest impressions 
from the plate, which was engraved, without doubt, in 1724 ; 
and after it was printed this copy received some curious addi- 
tions. The reference numbers 51, 52, and 53 are not printed 
from the plate, but are on a slip neatly pasted on the engrav- 
ing. The spires of u Hollis Street Meeting, built 1731," 

1 The foregoing paper has been compared with the manuscript in the British 
Museum, and is, we are assured, an exact transcript of it. Whether that is in 
the handwriting of Maverick, or is only a copy of his monograph, is not yet 
known. — Eds. 

2 King's Library, vol. cxx. No. 38 a. 



" Trinity Church founded 1734," and " Lynds Street Meeting 
built 1736," to which these numbers are attached, are also 
pasted on ; and some other additions have been made by 
pasting. It is to be hoped that an unaltered copy of the 
first edition of Price's view may yet be discovered. 

The President laid before the meeting a printed circular 
from the Buffalo Historical Society, inviting members to attend 
the ceremonies at the re-interment of the Indian orator and 
statesman, Red Jacket, and of other distinguished Indian 
chiefs of the Six Nations, in Buffalo, October 9. 

The President also read a letter from Mr. Henry S. Stone, 
of Providence, who offered to the Society for its acceptance 
the Brigade Book of the American army under General John 
Sullivan, during its encampment on Winter Hill, in 1775. 

Mr. Chase referred to the recent publication of documents, 
showing that General Samuel Parsons of the Continental army 
was a spy in the service of the enemy, and stated that it was 
possible that Major Andre was aware that among the officers 
of the court who determined his fate was another American 
general who, like Arnold, was a traitor to his country. 

Mr. Porter presented the Enlistment List of Company I of 
the Twentieth Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteers, under 
Captain W. F. Bartlett, in 1861. 

Mr. Young presented the commission of John Popkin as 
Lieutenant-Colonel of the Third Battalion of Artillery, to take 
rank as such from the 15th day of July, 1777, signed by his 
Excellency Samuel Huntington, President of the Congress of 
the United States at Philadelphia, and Benjamin Stocldert, 
Secretary of the Board of War. He stated also that in the 
original certificate of membership of the Society of the Cin- 
cinnati, which had been presented at a former meeting, 1 the 
name of this officer appears as Colonel John Popkins ; and he 
read the following extracts from a manuscript account of the 
family, written by the Rev. John Shelling Popkin, D.D., for 
some years Professor of Greek Literature in Harvard College, 
which contains interesting historical facts, besides explaining 
the discrepancy already mentioned : — 

"Before the war, and in the troublous times that preceded, the 
young men of Boston formed independent military companies, for 

1 Ante, p. 76. 

1881.] POPKIN, NOT POPKINS. 251 

learning and exercise. One was an artillery company of mechanics, 
whose skill was in demand at that time in the army. Another was of 
Grenadiers, and another of Cadets, which last were accounted the Gen- 
tlemen, and were commanded by John Hancock.* They all appear to 
have been separated by the war; as was the Ancient and Honorable 
Artillery Company. I remember the revival of this last company after 
the war under Captain Bell, who had been nominal captain a number 
of years. General Henry Knox, I think, was Lieutenant of the Gren- 
adiers ; and for his ability and information and address was promoted 
to the chief command of all the artillery, four regiments, — Massachu- 
setts, and I believe New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. He had 
been a bookseller and doubtless a reader, and showed some notion of 
engineering, and was in general a man of intelligence, and was in 
the esteem and confidence of General Washington. 

" My parents were John and Rebecca Popkin. Both were born in 
Boston. He was in the army during the War of the Revolution. He 
entered at or near Cambridge in 1775, Captain of Artillery; and came 
out at West Point, in 1783, Lieutenant-Colonel of the Massachusetts 
Regiment, of which John Crane, of Boston, was Colonel, and William 
Perkins, of Boston, Major. The old Boston folks always called us 
Popkins ; but we have always rejected the sibilant, hissing or buzzing 
letter. Where Washington Irving found his Alderman Popkins, in the 
• Tales of a Traveller,' I know not ; but his Italian host has the name 
more correctly, though he has somewhat Italicized the title : ■ Milor — 
Almanno — Aldermanno Popkin — Popkin — Popkin — pop — pop — 
pop.' " 

A new serial, containing the Proceedings from April to June 
inclusive, was laid on the table by the Secretary. 



The stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 13th instant. 
The President being absent from the city, Dr. George E. 
Ellis occupied the chair. 

The Secretary's minutes of the last meeting were read and 

The Librarian's list of donations to the Library was pre- 
sented, and special mention was made of an important collec- 
tion of pamphlets relating to the Rebellion, which had been 
given by Mr. Amos A. Lawrence. 

Colonel Lee, in behalf of the Committee on English Re- 
search, 1 reported that the services rendered by Mr. Henry F. 
Waters to the cause of historical research, — notably the recent 
discovery by him in England of the Winthrop map and the 
Maverick manuscript, two of the most valuable and interest- 
ing contributions made in relation to our early colonial his- 
tory since the incorporation of this Society — well deserve 
recognition ; and the Committee therefore recommend that 
they be authorized to receive from the treasury of the Society 
the sum of one hundred dollars a year, for three successive 
years, as a contribution towards the carrying on of this work. 

The recommendation was adopted. 

The Treasurer offered the following vote, which was 
passed : — 

Voted, That the sum of six hundred dollars, being the income 
of the Massachusetts Historical Trust Fund for the }^ear end- 
ing Sept. 1, 1884, be and is hereby appropriated toward the 
publication of a volume of Trumbull Papers, and that the 
words " Published at the charge of the Massachusetts Histor- 
ical Trust Fund " be placed on the titlepage of the volume. 

Dr. Ellis then spoke as follows : — 

We miss our honored President from his chair to-day, as he 
is absent on a brief visit to New York. Our regret at the loss 

1 Ante, p 249. — Eds. 

1884.] REMARKS OF DR. ELLIS. 25'J 

of his presence, on rare occasions, is relieved only by our well- 
warranted expectations of receiving on his return some inci- 
dental fruits of his observation and experience. 

By the usages of this Society the death of Mr. Ellis Ames, 
which occurred since our last meeting, would not be a subject 
of special notice by us to-day, as his name had just been with- 
drawn by him from our roll, on account of his bodily infirmi- 
ties. But he had been so recently with us — his withdrawal, 
offered last winter, not having then been admitted by the 
Council, and allowed only with reluctance when renewed at 
our last meeting, while the vacancy has not yet been filled — 
that we cannot part with him without some expression of our 
esteem and regret. I recall the occasion when at a meeting 
of this Society Mr. Ames was proposed for membership hy 
Chief Justice Shaw. He was elected Aug. 12, 1852. Very 
busy as he was with an extensive legal practice in this city 
and in a wide region round his home in Canton, largely in 
towns of the Old Colony, he was glad to be present at our 
meetings, where he was an interested listener when he was 
not entertaining us with some of his quaintly characteristic 
communications. He represented in the Society an element 
which, in its proportion, is needed as essential and becoming 
here. Dispensing with all graces of rhetoric and literary 
finish, he had a gift for exact statement and for curt utterance. 
He was one of those indispensable brethren in an historical 
and antiquarian fellowship, able and willing to search out a 
class of facts dry as the old records, without a particle of juice 
or fragrance, but giving to history a quality like toughness in 
parchment. As a commissioner for editing and publishing the 
formidable volumes of the Province Laws, his own single pair 
of eyes, with the keen instinct behind them, answered the uses 
of a thousand ordinary orbs of vision. Coming here with 
some of the pleasing rusticities of his country home in garb 
and mien and phrase and speech, his individuality brought to 
us pleasure and profit, 

It gratifies this Society from time to time to recognize the 
more important contributions made to our history by our 
associates, whether coming through our own publications or 
through independent channels. The addition which our asso- 
ciate Mr. Parkman has just made to his admirable series of 
volumes under the general title of " France and England in 


North America," is in itself a work which alone might well 
claim for him the highest tribute for ability, fidelity, compre- 
hensive and diligent research, and a marvellous skill in narra- 
tive and descriptive writing. The work, bearing the names of 
" Montcalm and Wolfe," — the two heroic generals, who both 
fell on the field where they sustained, in defeat or victory, the 
glory and empire of France and England on this continent, — 
is one of high genius and of a unique interest. While the 
author has given to it the fruitage of forty years of continuous 
devotion and absorption of time and thought, in exploration 
by land and water, and in research in documentary archives, 
with his unequalled skill in woodcraft and in Indian life and 
lore, he has furnished himself for dealing with this crowning 
tragedy of his theme with the richest equipment of authentic 
materials of record. Private cabinets, especially some in 
France and England, which have heretofore been jealously 
guarded, have been opened confidentially to him by the noble 
representatives of prime actors in his history, as a tribute to 
his own high qualities for an able and impartial dealing with 
them. Thousands of folios of original official pages, still quick 
and warm with the burning conflicts and passions which make 
their tenor, have now for the first time been put to full service 
by him to clear up, rectify, and present with exact fidelity, 
some perplexed and critical subjects, till now only tentatively 
and superficially dealt with. The episode of especial inter- 
est in the work relates to the deportation of the so-called 
French Neutrals from Acadia. We have now offered to us 
a candid and truthful view of the occasions and processes 
of that tragic event. The share of Massachusetts in what- 
ever was cruel or inevitably necessary in that incident comes 
through the engagement in it of our provincial forces auxil- 
iary to the British Regulars, under the command of our 
Major-General John Winslow. It adds another cloud to the 
shadows resting on old Acadia, that though Winslow died 
the year preceding the outbreak of our Revolution, so many 
of his own nearest of kin, with thousands of our native 
Loyalists, driven from their homes, were forced to find a 
refuge in and near the regions whence the Acadians were 

I have received for presentation to this Society, through the 
hands of Miss R. M. Farnsworth, — a cousin of the late Mr. 

1884.] REMARKS OF DR. ELLIS. 255 

Ebenezer Thayer, an old Bostonian, long a resident of Brook- 
lyn, N. Y., where he died, — a china plate, enclosed in a richly 
ornamented frame, which has value as a relic. It comes to us 
from Mr. Thayer's executors, as directed by his will. The 
plate is one of a set presented to George and Martha Wash- 
ington by a French officer whose name is now unknown, 
though it was not Lafayette. Some papers accompanying the 
gift would fully authenticate it if any such evidence were 
needed. Mr. Thayer himself received it from Mrs. Rosalie 
Eugenia Stuart Webster. It was given to her by' the wife of 
her half-brother, George Washington Parke Custis, an adopted 
son of General Washington. Mrs. Webster was a daughter 
of Dr. David Stuart, of Virginia, who married the widow of 
Mr. Custis, whose children by her were thus half brothers and 
sisters of the Custis children. The plate shows in a circlet 
the names of fifteen of our States, including Vermont and 
Kentucky, richly en wreathed. It must, then, have been man- 
ufactured after June 1, 1792, when Kentucky was admitted 
into the Union. As Washington was elected for his second 
term as President in the autumn of that year, the present to 
him may have been made in recognition of his new honor. 
The enwreathed names of the States surround with a halo an 
illuminated monogram, — a large W and a small M, — sur- 
mounted by the legend, Deem et Tutamen ah Illo. The rich- 
ness of the mounting shows the value attached to the relic, 
and is in keeping with its own beauty. 

As the plate comes to our hands, an accident which had 
some time previously befallen it gives it a symbolical char- 
acter. A fracture running from the top to the bottom divides 
the circle into two unequal parts, strangely corresponding, as 
it severs the names of the States, with the line marked between 
those which seceded and those which held to the Union. The 
line of fracture divides the name of Maryland nearly equally. 
This, too, is significant. Happily the fracture is firmly closed 
with cement and rivets. 

Mrs. Webster has written, in a note accompanying this gift 
to us, that the only child of her brother "was robbed of 
Arlington by the President and Congress of the United 
States." But as this relic was not included among the 
stolen goods, we can have no scruple in gratefully receiving 
it with due acknowledgments. 


Mr. Lord was appointed to prepare a Memoir of the late 
Mr. Williams Latham, which had been previously assigned 
to Mr. Ellis Ames, who left one in an unfinished state. 

Communications from the Third Section having been called 
for, Mr. R. C. Winthrop, Jr., said : — 

I will take the opportunity to communicate, by title only, 
a series of letters written between 1653 and 1688 by mem- 
bers of the family of Sylvester. Gentlemen who read the 
" Daily Advertiser " may remember a long account of an 
interesting celebration on Shelter Island, in Long Island 
Sound, on the 21st of July last, commemorative of Nathaniel 
Sylvester, an English merchant who subsequently became a 
Quaker, and who was one of the early proprietors of Shelter 
Island, a portion of which is still in possession of descen- 
dants of his in the female line. On this occasion a monu- 
ment was dedicated to him, and addresses were delivered 
by Professor Horsford, of Cambridge, and others. The Presi- 
dent of this Society, remembering that he had seen Sylvester 
letters in the unexplored portion of the Winthrop Papers, 
recently suggested to me to examine them. I found nine 
letters from Nathaniel Sylvester aforesaid, one from his 
brother, Constant Sylvester, four from his brother Giles Syl- 
vester, one from his brother Joshua Sylvester, a fragment 
of a letter from Grizzell Sylvester, wife of Nathaniel, and 
eleven letters from her son Giles Sylvester the younger ; also 
a memorandum of certain clauses in the patent for Shelter 
Island, together with a scrap of paper indorsed " Capt. Syl- 
vester's Ague," which gives a harrowing account of the peri- 
odic recurrence of what the writer terms "a most exceeding 
great payn in my stomach," which, I trust, has not proved 

These letters possess a considerable degree of personal in- 
terest, but are of little public importance, and I do not in- 
tend to read any of them to the Society. I am having them 
copied, however, and may select a few extracts for the next 
volume of Proceedings, if the Council see fit. The only pas- 
sage I have thus far marked is illustrative of the early de- 
velopment in New England of a taste for genealogical and 
heraldic research. Under date of Shelter Island, Aug. 19, 
1677, Giles Sylvester, Jr., writes Wait Winthrop: — 


"The occasion of my giving you the trouble of this is that, hav- 
ing received two letters from Capt. Salisbury earnestly entreating me to 
send him a draught of a scutcheon borne by the name of Salisbury, 
which he chanced to have the sight of in Gwillim whilst I had the 
perusal of it, but, having returned the book to you, I cannot pleasure 
him, unless you will please to favor me with a copy of the same, men- 
tioning its colours, by this bearer who returns shortly. Capt. Salisbury 
wants it to compare with his own lately sent to him from his sister 
in England. If there be any crest mentioned, please insert it." 

As I am about to furnish the descendants of Nathaniel 
Sylvester with a file of family papers hitherto unknown, I feel 
at liberty to offer a gentle criticism upon the inscription they 
have seen fit to place on his monument. It is a long and 
intricate one, commemorating not merely Nathaniel himself 
and his predecessors and successors at Shelter Island, but also 
the sufferings of certain Quakers, male and female, who took 
refuge there, and some of whose descendants, represented by 
Professors Peirce and Dyer, of Harvard College, took an ac- 
tive part in the celebration. After a recital of the names of 
these Quakers, who are variously described on the monument 
as having been "despoiled, imprisoned, starved, whipped, ban- 
ished, much-scourged, mutilated, branded, and maimed," the 
inscription proceeds : " The Puritan in his pride, overcome 
by the faith of the Quaker, gave Lexington and Concord 
and Bunker Hill to History." I may be very obtuse, but I 
have read this sentence over and over again without being 
able to grasp its meaning. I am not familiar with any evi- 
dence that the pride of the Puritan ever was overcome by the 
faith of the Quaker ; nor am I able to understand how this 
alleged triumph of Quaker faith could have had any effect 
upon the battles of the Revolution. I do not wish to seem to 
disparage Quakers, — on the contrary, I have some personal 
reasons for thinking well of them, — but, so far as our Revo- 
lutionary struggle is concerned, I think we can fairly congrat- 
ulate ourselves that the men who stood behind the redoubt on 
Bunker Hill and the bridge at Concord were not believers 
in the doctrine of non-resistance. 

Before I sit clown, I should like to add a few words of 
criticism upon another inscription on a still more recently 
erected monument to a more distinguished man of about the 
same period. The inscription on the base of John Harvard's 


statue is as short as that on Nathaniel Sylvester's monument 
is long ; but, like the latter, it presents an obscurity to my 
mind. It runs, " John Harvard — Founder — 1638." Now 
this date 1638 may have been intended to signify merely that 
John Harvard died in that year, and if the inscription had 
been, " John Harvard — Founder — died 1638," I should have 
had nothing to say ; but it seems to me that the successive 
generations of students, whose eyes will rest with admiration 
upon this most successful work of art, must inevitably obtain 
the impression that the date 1638, following immediately upon 
the word " Founder," denotes the natal year of their Alma 
Mater. It is within my knowledge that strangers have already 
so interpreted it, and have been puzzled to reconcile the date 
1638 with the distinct statement in the official catalogues 
of the University that this natal year was 1636. The accom- 
plished man who presides over the destinies of the College 
has made sweeping changes there during his term of office, 
and is understood to contemplate many more. This inscrip- 
tion could hardly have failed to be submitted to him, — was, 
for aught I know, written by him, — and it may perhaps be 
an indication that he has made up his mind that the dates 
assigned by his predecessors are as faulty as was their sys- 
tem of instruction, and has decreed that the titlepage of the 
forthcoming Quinquennial Catalogue, due next summer, shall 
take a new departure. Whether this be so or not, my con- 
tention is that this time-honored natal year 1636, recognized, 
as it has been, not merely in University Catalogues, but by 
successive historians of the College, bv successive historians 
of New England, and in all encyclopaedias and works of refer- 
ence, so far as I am familiar with them, is in danger of being 
overshadowed and cast into comparative oblivion by the new 
date, 1638, which now greets us on the Delta. Somebody 
may remind me that the seal of the College, as emblazoned on 
the north side of the pedestal of this same statue, also bears 
date 1638; but my answer to this is that the College has 
had a number of seals, the earliest of which bore no date 
whatever; and this present one, dated 1638, would appear to 
be of recent invention, as I find no mention of it in Presi- 
dent Quincy's History of the University. I do not wish to 
take up time by citing authorities, but I should like to call 
attention to a single sentence in Palfrey's " History of New 

1884.] JOHN HAHVARD's STATUE. 259 

England." » After giving the date of the institution of the 
College by the General Court of Massachusetts as Oct. 28, 
1636, the author proceeds to indorse a passage in a speech of 
Edward Everett, delivered at that famous commemoration of 
the two hundredth anniversary of the College, in 1836, which 
some gentlemen present may remember. Dr. Palfrey's words 
are, M That Massachusetts Assembly over which Henry Vane 
presided has been said to be the first body by which the 
people, by their representatives, ever gave their own money 
to found a place of education." I am not, Sir, I confess, as 
enthusiastic an admirer of Sir Harry Vane as some members 
of this Society probably are; but it has always seemed to me 
one of the most interesting features of Vane's brief career in 
this country, that during the single year of his Governorship, 
and under his auspices, the College at Cambridge should have 
been instituted. I think we should be slow to permit this 
feather to be plucked from the cap of a man who went to the 
scaffold in the cause of civil and religious liberty. The last 
person to desire it would, I believe, have been John Harvard. 
We must each form our own conception of the character of a 
young man of whom we know so little and to whom we owe 
so much ; but, for my own part, I like to picture Harvard as 
one who was not merely a lover of learning, but a lover of 
justice, — as one who, had he been present in the spirit, as per- 
haps he was, a few weeks ago, in Sanders Theatre, and had he 
possessed any means of intelligible manifestation, would have 
made haste, at the conclusion of the exercises, to do two things: 
First, to express his acknowledgments to all concerned in 
erecting the memorial, — to the eloquent and learned orator 
of the day (Dr. Ellis) in particular ; and, second, to say to the 
assembled audience: "I am proud and happy that you consider 
me jcmv founder, — and so I suppose I was, more than any 
one man, — but I am sorry the inscription on my statue should 
imply the slightest want of recognition of the fact that long 
before my death, before I had ever set foot on these shores, 
the magistrates of the Massachusetts Colony had taken formal 
steps to establish a seat of learning, to which they subsequently 
assigned my name." 2 

i Vol. i. p. 548. 

2 It is beyond question that in 1636 the General Court not only determined 
to establish a college, but actually made an appropriation of money towards it. 


Mr. Quincy then addressed the Society substantially in 
these words : — 

I have brought with me this little book, which I present to 
the Society. Its interest is not very great, but it will give 
me the opportunity of saying some words which seem to be 
due to the memory of a remarkable man. These few pages 
of manuscript preserve an imperfect record of certain conver- 
sations with Alexandre Vattemare, or, to speak more correctly, 
of his part in those conversations. They were copied by a 
Boston lady — the late Mrs. B. D. Greene — from journals 
which she was about to destroy. It must be confessed that 
such traces of the nimble-minded Frenchman as are here to 
be found are somewhat meagre and disappointing. I had the 
privilege of knowing Mr. Vattemare when he was in this 
country, and later in my life I visited him at his house in 
Paris. And in that delightful home-circle — in which four 
generations were represented — I well remember the charm of 
his conversation. To a varied experience he added a despotic 
command over the accessories of speech. His countenance, 
which in repose was as sad as any human face I ever saw, 

It is likewise unquestionable that in 1637 they designated a place at which the 
college should be located. It was to this institution, which he recognized as 
having been already created, that John Harvard bequeathed the half of his estate. 
These facts are plainly stated in the Harvard University Catalogue of the present 
year, on page 10 : — 

" Harvard College was founded in 1636, by a vote passed at an adjourned 
meeting (October 28, Old Style) of the General Court of the Colony of Massa- 
chusetts Bay which convened on September 8th of that year. The language of 
the vote was as follows : — 

" ' The Court agree to give Four Hundred Founds towards a School or College., 
whereof Two Hundred Pounds shall be paid the next year, and Two Hundred 
Pounds when the work is finished, and the next Court to appoint where and what 

" The ensuing year (1637) the General Court appointed twelve of the most 
eminent men of the colony (among whom were John Cotton and John Winthrop) 
' to take order for a college at Newtown.' The name, ' Newtown,' was soon after- 
wards changed by the General Court to Cambridge, in recognition of the English 
University where many of the colonists had been educated. 

" The following year (1638) John Harvard, a non-conforming clergyman of 
England, who had been in the colony about one year, died at Charlestown, 
leaving half of his whole property and his entire library (about 300 volumes) to 
the institution." 

The Constitution of Massachusetts, framed in 1780, expressly declares that 
"our wise and pious ancestors, so early as the year one thousand six hundred 
and thirty-six, laid the foundation of Harvard College." — University Cata- 
logue, p. 16. 


would suddenly light up, and represent, by its exquisite mo- 
bility, the nice gradation of mirth, of reproach, or of sympathy 
which it was necessary to convey ; and when his resources 
of facial expression seemed inadequate to illustrate the mas- 
tering sentiment, they would be assisted by gesticulation full 
of energy and grace. That bright, entertaining gossip, result- 
ing from extensive travel and intimacy with the conspicuous 
personages of his time, was generally tethered in some way or 
other to the serious purpose of his life. No doubt Mr. Vatte- 
mare's decisions were often rough, and by no means closed the 
subject upon which they were uttered. He disclosed his pass- 
ing feelings and opinions with utter frankness. Absorbed in 
his great work of diffusing knowledge among the nations, he 
would wear his heart upon his sleeve for daws to peck at, — 
a circumstance which the daws, as their nature is, did not 
leave unnoticed. Report our unguarded talk, and the best of 
us are vulnerable. The wnnged sentences of this man would 
be likely to fly through the nets of any reporter, were they set 
never so deftly ; and such stragglers as might be caught would 
fail to convey the true emphasis of his discourse. It is per- 
haps doubtful whether reminiscences of conversation ought to 
be preserved. We can never supply the social medium in 
which the dead words were once alive and penetrative ; the 
reader may easily receive a false impression as he hurries over 
them. So much it seems well to say before resigning this 
manuscript to such fate as shall befall it : I venture to hope 
that it will not be printed. 

And now what claims has Mr. Vattemare to the notice of 
a society pledged to the right reading of Massachusetts his- 
tory? I think they are these: First, to him, more than to 
any other man, we owe the foundation of the great public 
library which is the pride of this city. Second, his brilliant 
life-work — of which this was but one of the beneficent results 
— has been obscured by vague and irresponsible innuendo. 
His name has been associated, if not with actual reproach, at 
least with a slur of interrogation, the justice of which I em- 
phatically deny. As testimony to the existence of these 
shadows of depreciation which have beclouded the name of 
Alexandre Vattemare, I cannot do better than quote an ad- 
mirable summary of a portion of his achievements given by 
Mr. Justin Winsor in the " Memorial History of Boston." 


" Whatever we think of Vattemare, whether we call him an enthu- 
siast or something worse or better, we must recognize his contagious 
energy, which induced State after State to succumb to his representa- 
tions, so that by 1853 he had brought one hundred and thirty libraries 
and institutions within his operations, and between 1847 and 1851 had 
brought from France for American libraries 30,655 volumes, beside 
maps, engravings, etc." x 

This is truly a record of brilliant achievement; one going far 
to justify the prophecy of our minister to France, Mr. Cass, that 
Alexandre Vattemare would be " ranked among the benefac- 
tors of mankind, and like them be rewarded with universal 
esteem." But why the non-committalism of judgment con- 
tained in the words which I have emphasized ? Before at- 
tempting to answer the question, let me say that I have no 
reflection to make upon the historian for writing just as he 
did. He implies, in language properly cautious and reserved, 
the existence of a fog of suspicion which somehow had come 
to obscure the outline of an heroic figure. It certainly had 
obscured it ; and Mr. Winsor is not to be blamed for hinting 
at the fact. 

After such inquiry as I have been able to make T can dis- 
cover but two sources whence may have come a chill upon 
that cordial recognition of a useful career which was emphati- 
cally its clue. I will mention them in the inverse order of 
their importance. 

At the close of our civil war Mr. Hypolite Vattemare wished 
to carry on the system for the international exchange of books 
which his father had so successfully inaugurated. But it was 
soon rumored that this gentleman had been one of the writers 
upon American affairs for the " Patrie," a journal bitterly hos- 
tile to the preservation of the Union. Mr. F. W. Seward, 
representing the State Department, commented upon this in- 
telligence with an asperity which was as natural as its implied 
deductions were inconsequential. Negotiations were abruptly 
closed ; and at that time it doubtless happened that the well- 
earned fame of the elder Vattemare suffered some eclipse be- 
fore a nation to whose service he had been especially devoted. 
This was probably one of the causes — although here in Boston 
it was certainly the least important cause — of the misjudg- 
ment to which allusion has been made. 

1 Memorial History of Boston, vol. iv. p. 286, note. 


There was a voice which many years ago proceeded out of 
a once influential nucleus of opinion in this city, and that voice 
was understood, upon some occasion or other, to have pro- 
nounced Mr. Vattemare a charlatan. I shall not try to indi- 
vidualize this astonishing utterance. It is sufficient to say that 
it was one of quite a number of hasty judgments which came 
from a small circle of considerable pretension — and, in many 
respects, of eminent desert — to which the late Mr. Thomas 
B. Curtis gave a designation of some felicity. He used to dis- 
tinguish this core and centre of intellectual Boston from its 
more or less vulgar outlying dependencies under the title of 
u Boston Proper." In topography the term is familiar enough : 
the humor lay in the new meaning put into it by a slightly 
sarcastic emphasis which I cannot hope to imitate successfully. 
And truly in those good old days — back some thirty or forty 
years in the past — there was a Boston within Boston, cul- 
tured, moral, conservative, and — proper. I feel great tender- 
ness for this dead Boston proper. I was brought up in it — 
or, I might more modestly say, on the outskirts of it — and 
should like nothing better than to chronicle its many virtues, 
of which I am fully conscious. It had provincial characteris- 
tics, good as well as bad, and it is to our loss that we have 
fallen away from some of its standards of living. Neverthe- 
less, there was in it a certain narrowness of perception, which 
could not easily admit the merit of contemporary character 
which influenced the world outside its own very respectable 
boundaries. It was apt to take its own notions of what was 
proper as a criterion for the rest of mankind ; it would in all 
honesty say its Sunday praj^er " for all sorts and conditions of 
men," but found some difficulty in a week-day effort to under- 
stand them and to do them justice. I do not care to repeat 
the grotesque decisions which, when a boy, I remember to 
have heard its oracular voices utter concerning Ralph Waldo 
Emerson, then in the earlier part of his career. Neither is 
there need of recalling the undiscriminating epithets which I 
have heard those same voices apply — I will not say to men 
of aggressive personality like Garrison and Theodore Parker, 
but to prominent members of the old Free Soil party ; some 
of them members, perhaps, of this very reputable Society, 
whose names it will be better taste in me not to mention. We 
smile in recalling these foolish judgments. The worthy citi- 


zens alluded to have gone in and out before us for a genera- 
tion since those grievous misapprehensions were uttered. They 
have hosts of friends eager to report them and their cause 
aright to the unsatisfied. Biographies are not, or will not be, 
wanting to throw the most favorable light upon whatever they 
did that was good, and to conceal in graceful shadow such 
human frailties as they did not escape. What do we care for 
some evil name that this prejudiced Boston proper may once 
have flung at them ? It did not stick. In the case of Mr. 
Vattemare it did stick. He was a foreigner, one of a nation 
always under suspicion of revolutionary vehemence ; his meth- 
ods were not in accordance with the sober movements dear to 
the Anglo Saxon temperament ; he left among us no band of 
champions bound by every social and family tie to do him jus- 
tice ; and so it came to pass that the hasty word of disparage- 
ment which was cast at him left a mark which is not yet 

Before passing from the subject I think it right to mention 
— though surely not to press — a suggestion which has been 
made as having had something to do with the obscuration 
which has befallen Mr. Vattemare's good name. The parable 
tells us that the men who were called earliest into the vineyard 
begrudged an equal payment to those whose work began at 
the eleventh hour. The complaint is characteristic of human 
nature ; and a yet darker termination of the story would not 
discredit it as a picture of what might be in the heart of man. 
How if some laborer called into the vineyard in the cool of the 
evening, in order to magnify the importance of his own ser- 
vice, had been tempted to deny even an equal recompense to 
the toiler who had borne the burden and the heat of the day ! 
Some suggestion equivalent to this has, in other years, been 
made by the friends of Mr. Vattemare, who were puzzled to 
account for the scant justice which has been done him. But 
such an explanation is unnecessary, and, in view of our in- 
ability to unravel the complexity of human motives, should 
not be hastily adopted. 

I now come to the pleasanter duty of saying something 
about the man. Alexandre Vattemare was born in Paris near 
the close of the last century. In 1814, when still a youth, his 
acquaintance with surgery — for which profession he was stud} 7 - 
ing — caused him to be placed in charge of several hundred 


Prussian soldiers, and he was subsequently selected to accom- 
pany them to Berlin. Here some political movements resulted 
in his detention as a prisoner of war. While in captivity he 
amused himself by exercising his power of ventriloquism at 
the expense of the commandant and other officers, frightening 
them with strange noises, which they regarded as supernatural. 
It was by the advice of one of the military gentlemen thus 
befooled that he determined to use his remarkable powers as 
a means of support. At least this was Mr. Vattemare's ac- 
count, so far as it is preserved in this record of conversations, 
though I have elsewhere seen the statement that a desire to 
relieve the wants of a French family of utter strangers to him 
was a potent factor in shaping his career. 

Mr. Winsor gives Mr. Vattemare's bread-winning profession 
as that of a conjurer. The word is certainly misleading. He 
is better described as an actor, or personator, of very uncommon 
powers. Had he been associated with a metropolitan stage 
and performed single parts in the plays there represented, his 
fame would undoubtedly have passed into literature like that 
of Garrick or Talma. But Alexandre — for under that name 
Vattemare exercised his art — was something more than what 
is now called a star actor ; he was also a supporting company. 
He was the creator of a delightful form of entertainment which 
the elder Mathews afterwards imitated with considerable suc- 
cess. He had been known to represent no less than forty-four 
characters in a single evening, giving to each a distinct indi- 
viduality. The testimony of Sir Walter Scott, and others of 
critical eminence, to the extraordinary personations and trans- 
formations of this man account for the crowds that flocked to 
his entertainments. Before 1819 the fame of the wonderful 
Alexandre had extended through Germany and Austria, and 
penetrated to Hungary and Poland. After a visit to the Neth- 
erlands he proceeded to Great Britain, where ample harvests 
of renown and profit awaited him. During his travels Vatte- 
mare had been received and feted by three emperors and by 
quite a rabble of kings. He had also won the friendship of 
many of the most distinguished men and women of the time, 
as the collection of letters which he called his Album Cosmopo- 
lite abundantly showed. His receipts were enormous, and his 
charities were in proportion to them. In Dublin alone his 
donations to public uses are said to have exceeded a thousand 



pounds. Of the one hundred thousand rubles received for a 
visit to St. Petersburg, one half was given to the inhabitants 
of a Russian town that was destroyed by fire. But soon a 
larger charity than could be wrought by generous gifts of 
money began to occupy the attention of this much-followed 

In every city he visited, Mr. Vattemare's tastes would lead 
him to the libraries; and I have heard him describe the feel- 
ings that came over him upon seeing books piled together, or 
glued to their shelves as if under the spell of some malign 
enchantment, while all about them were ignorance and apathy. 
The libraries in the European capitals were, to be sure, nomi- 
nally free ; but the cataloguing was very imperfect, and red 
tape often held their doors against the people as securely as 
iron bars. There were small facilities for acquiring new 
books, and the subjects treated in the old ones had very little 
to do with the life that was then being lived. There were 
huge volumes devoted to controversial theology or to the dis- 
cussion of insoluble transcendental problems ; there was a great 
deal that concerned the Greeks and the Romans, but which had 
no special bearing upon questions which modern men must 
answer, or perish. And as the popular actor wandered among 
those lonely alcoves, there was flashed upon him what the next 
advance in civilization ought to be. The dumb oracles must 
be made to speak. The stagnant reservoirs of the past must 
be filled from the living fountains of the present, and the 
masses invited to quench their thirst. Was not this a sound 
conclusion ? If we could transport ourselves back sixty years 
into the past, we should have no doubt that this was the work 
of practical utility next in order to be done. And a man had 
been found to do it, — one ready to resign the flatteries and the 
luxuries which fortune was heaping upon him, and to go forth 
as a knight-errant in the cause of the intellectual emancipa- 
tion of the people. 

About the year 1827 Mr. Vattemare began to devote his 
time, energy, and property to the introduction of his system 
of the international exchange of books, and, incidentally, of 
any products of nature or human skill which might increase 
knowledge in science or art. To borrow the language of its 
author, the system was " designed to give the intellectual treas- 
ures of the cultivated world the same dissemination and equali- 


zation which commerce has already given to its material ones ; " 
and the outcome was to be u the establishment in every quarter 
of the world of free public libraries and museums ever open to 
the use of the people." A just estimate of his plan of pro- 
cedure is scarcely to be had from our present position. One 
of the best tests of its excellence is the fact that the populari- 
zation of libraries, which it was its object to promote, has ren- 
dered its continuance unnecessary. The fresh thought and 
invention of the nations is now open to all as a matter of 
course. It was the merit of Vattemare to create a sentiment 
that has caused methods which were once the best to be super- 
seded by those which are still better. Success in amusing the 
public was now used simply as a means towards accomplishing 
the end he had in view. To adopt his own expression as pre- 
served in these records, " When Vattemare failed to interest 
the attention, or gain admission to important personages, 
Alexandre took his place and carried the clay." 

The labors of twelve years, pursued, in the words of Arago, 
" with a generosity almost unparalleled in modern times," were 
abundantly successful in introducing the system of interna- 
tional exchanges throughout Europe. And then was under- 
taken that mission to America which Lafayette had so strongly 
urged. In 1839 Mr. Vattemare landed in New York. " My 
first sentiments," he says, " were those of despair , for I found 
no institutions like our own open to the public, and therefore 
no means of laying the treasures which I proposed to bring 
into the United States before the people." Happily the de- 
spair was only momentary. If there was more work to be 
done, he would make further draughts upon his indomitable 
energy and do it. He must not only bring books for the 
people, but must create free libraries to put them in. This is 
not the place to detail the tireless labors by which his plans 
were developed and brought to the attention of those who had 
the power to further them. They were finally indorsed by 
both Houses of Congress, as well as by the legislatures of some 
of the States. Many of the most eminent men of the country 
became his friends, and gave efficient aid in carrying out his 
work. It is with regret that I pass over the interesting inci- 
dents of Mr. Vattemare's career in America, and limit myself 
to what he did in Boston towards the foundation of the munici- 
pal library which our citizens now enjoy. 


On the 5th of May, 1841, a meeting was held in this city to 
take into consideration the plans for popularizing knowledge 
advocated by this ardent Frenchman. He urged the creation 
of an institution embracing within itself the existing libraries 
and the collections of scattered societies. An excellent com- 
mittee was appointed who should make a serious attempt to 
carry out Mr. Vattemare's idea of a great library free to all 
the people. " The author of this plan," said the committee, 
" unfolded it with a minuteness of detail, both in regard to it- 
self and to its results, which showed the meeting how deeply 
in earnest he was, and how easy he thought it would be to 
carry it into the fullest effect." Notwithstanding the labors of 
the gentlemen he had interested, it was found that the liberal 
views of our visitor could not then be realized. It was the old 
story of jealousy, and unwillingness or inability to co-operate 
on the part of those whom circumstances had placed in posi- 
tions of authority. But repulse came to a man who was hard- 
ened to it, and who would cling all the more tenaciously to an 
idea with which his personality had become identified. After 
six more years of unremitted effort for the diffusion of knowl- 
edge, Mr. Vattemare returned to Boston, and succeeded in es- 
tablishing the free public library that he was determined that 
we should have. 

" The foundation of the noble municipal library which now 
adorns the city of Boston," writes Mr. Edward Edwards in his 
" History of Free Town Libraries," " may be traced to the year 
1847 as the date of its virtual commencement, although for 
more than three years after that date the initiatory steps 
were not very actively or successfully followed up." Chief 
among these initiatory steps, which the historian truly declares 
founded the library, was that taken by Alexandre Vattemare, 
who brought a valuable collection of books from the city of Paris, 
and made an urgent appeal to the municipal authorities to take 
immediate measures for the establishment of the free library 
which should adorn Boston. He told them, with the sublime 
assurance of a prophet, that then was the accepted time ; the 
books received from France must be made the nucleus of a 
great public institution. During his visits to Boston in 1847 
and 1848 the idea of establishing a free library in this city 
seemed to pervade him even to his fingers' ends. He followed 
it up with a vehemence which might well startle the guardians 


of the sluggish proprieties. He pursued the Mayor with visits 
and by correspondence ; he wrought upon that functionary to 
make a conditional offer of $5,000 towards providing books for 
the library, and to see that a petition was sent to the legisla- 
ture for permission to levy taxes for its support. It was upon 
the legislative act of 1848, obtained by the persistent zeal of 
Mr. Vattemare, that the superstructure of our public library 
has been reared. It was that room in City Hall, set apart- to 
receive the books he generously brought us, which gave it a 
local habitation and a name. 

Is it said that the initial offering of Mr. Vattemare seems 
insignificant when compared with the gifts of money or of 
service which afterwards built up the library ? It is insig- 
nificant as the bequest of John Harvard is insignificant when 
placed beside those costly benefactions which have made his 
College what it is to-day. Both these men gave at the right 
moment, and without them the dates of the foundations of 
beneficent institutions would be other than they are. But the 
outcome of an exuberant and devoted life is not to be com- 
pared with any dead man's legacj^, however opportunely it 
may have been received. Neither can we measure our obliga- 
tions to Mr. Vattemare by the time he spent in this city, nor 
by the energy he gave to the furtherance of our special work. 
Human words are something more than articulate sounds 
equal each to the other: the right man must speak them if 
they are to liberate pent-up forces. We can estimate the 
worth of that initiatory impulse only by remembering the long 
years of labor which had preceded it. A past generation was 
constrained to listen to this Frenchman because he bore the 
indorsements of distinguished men both in Europe and Amer- 
ica, — men whose indorsements were to be gained only by 
eminent desert. 

No past depreciation of Mr. Vattemare should tempt us to 
speak of him otherwise than justly. It is not to be denied 
that certain epithets which, as commonly used, are not com- 
mendatory, might be applied to him. Perhaps some gentle- 
man here present may tell us that he met Mr. Vattemare 
when in this country, and that he impressed him as an egotist 
and an enthusiast. I must admit the egotism, and will only 
plead in extenuation that the stage-performer who can give 
the public supreme delight has a tendency to self-appreciation 


which, if not necessitated by the molecular construction of his 
nervous system, is forced upon him by his exceptional envi- 
ronment. He is followed by admiring crowds wherever he 
goes ; wealth and flattery are poured upon him ; his society is 
sought, not only by royalty and nobility, but by contemporaries 
deservedly famous in the different spheres of human action. 
Almost of necessity, I say, such a man must think too highly 
of his own consequence. We do not expect him to conceive 
the cosmos comprehensively or with critical accuracy ; no one 
doubts that he will place himself somewhat too near the centre 
of it. We have reason to be satisfied if men possessing this 
perilous endowment lead an outwardly respectable life, talk 
on the whole virtuously to their numerous interviewers, and 
occasionally give some popular charity the lift of a benefit. 
The comic actor, in the prologue of Goethe's immortal drama, 
excuses himself for caring about posterity, seeing that he has 
business enough in looking after contemporary fun. To most 
men the excuse would seem sufficient ; to Mr. Vattemare it 
was not sufficient. His success in making contemporary fun 
was valued only because it placed him in a position to devote 
his life to the useful service of the world. What other success- 
ful actor can be mentioned who so regarded his opportunities 
of money-getting and of admission to courtly and gracious 
companies? But Mr. Vattemare has been called an enthusi- 
ast. If he is rightly described by the word, it must be used in 
its original signification, as one who acts under the constraint 
of the universal spirit which concerns itself with the whole. 
There is a meaning, more common in English speech, which 
implies a man of little judgment who throws himself away in 
pursuing impracticable Utopias. If the word is used in this 
sense, Mr. Vattemare is the last man it correctly describes. 
He proclaimed a true social want. Given a civilization based 
upon human knowledge and which had reached a certain point, 
he told men the next thing to be done, and proved his foresight 
by doing it. Enthusiasts such as he move the world; with- 
out them we should be repeating the life of the dark ages, or 
perhaps that of the cave men. 

'And here it will not be out of place to mention Mr. Vatte- 
mare's views upon a matter that has lately been somewhat 
discussed. Since the general establishment of free libraries, 
there have arisen questions touching their proper function. 


Should they supply ephemeral works of fiction, seasoned, 
many of them, to gratify a morbid appetite, and giving false 
ideas of the conditions of human. life and the requirements 
of duty ? Above all, what are we to say to a State which 
postulates in its constitution the existence of a Supreme 
Being, to whom man is accountable, and bases its apparatus 
for maintaining justice upon this assertion, and then pro- 
ceeds to tax its citizens, that the mass of the people, in- 
cluding the young and inexperienced, may be provided with 
speciously written books which deny this primal affirmation? 
I know the difficulty of drawing dividing lines. It would 
always have been very hard ; now I hold it to be im- 
possible. Democracy takes no backward step; it will never 
give up a concession. If we have gained wisdom through 
experience, we are wise, as the saying goes, after the event. 
Mr. Vattemare was wise before the event. The books which 
he devoted his life to bring to the doors of the people should 
contain profitable knowledge : they must be edifying ; they 
must tend to build up good citizens. And so, when the 
authors of France offered him copies of their works to bring 
to America, he declined some of them as writings which free 
libraries were under no obligation to provide ; among those 
declined were certain books by the most popular writers of 
their time. Mr. Vattemare may have shown his own limi- 
tation in some of these judgments ; I am not concerned to 
defend them as always correct. But, allowing for what the 
astronomers call the personal error, the instinct behind it 
was worthy of respect. And when, years ago, we decided 
that another impost should be laid upon our heavily taxed 
citizens to the end that in all our towns the boys and girls 
as they left the free schools might be provided with free 
libraries, — when we were about to establish the traditions of 
institutions then in embryo, — we may well raise the ques- 
tion whether they would not have been higher educational 
agencies, had we adopted Mr. Vattemare's view of the true 
purpose of their existence. 

I have confined myself to a notice of those parts of Mr. 
Vattemare's career which may claim the recognition of this 
Society. Of the work he did in Europe, this is not the 
occasion to speak. His love for America" was unbounded, 
and his zeal in our service often put to shame that of our 


paid officials. It was owing to his exertions that this coun- 
try was represented in the French Exhibition of 1856. The 
flag of every nation in Europe was to float over that beautiful 
building ; and he declared, with that wonderful energy which 
made light of obstacles, that the stars and stripes should be 
displayed there also. The show that he conjured into ex- 
istence was meagre enough, and provoked a smile from his 
transatlantic friends. " Ah, you may laugh at my exhibi- 
tion," exclaimed Mr. Vattemare, with the exultant glee of a 
school-boy; " but it has put your good flag up aloft, and. you 
will see it will win for you some medals and honorable 
mentions ! " 

The muse of History has sometimes been described as preju- 
diced and purchasable ; but the sub-muse of Local History, if 
mythology may be enriched with such a personage, is far 
more open to such accusations. She approaches the urn un- 
der strong social and pecuniary bias, and often draws out 
singular names to receive our homage. If one of the names 
therein contained is that of a foreigner, she is pretty sure 
not to find it. And what does it matter? Nothing surely 
to Alexandre Vattemare; something, perhaps, to the com- 
munity which overlooks his services, and cares not if a shade 
of unjust suspicion has come to rest upon his name. Never- 
theless, this rare type of man is as worthy of study — yes, 
and of admiration — as any book that he ever brought us. 
He seems to me a figure well-nigh unique. An enthusiast, 
if you will, but one whose head was never in the clouds ; 
one who would feed his fellows with wholesome food, never 
with wild theories, exaggerations, and unrealities. He was 
clear-sighted as well as unselfish, and so devoted his life 
to the diffusion of that higher human experience which dif- 
ferentiates civilized man from the savage and the brute. 

Judge Chamberlain referred to the alleged signing of the 
Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776, and gave some 
reasons for his conclusion that the printed Public Journal of 
Congress, so far as it relates to that event, is untrustworthy. 
This paper, which he communicated by title only, proclaims 
no new discovery. The subject, he said, has been often dis- 
cussed, and the facts relating to it have been publicly stated. 
Yet the old error prevails, and has been repeated by writers 


of historical repute. It seems necessary not only to disprove 
it, but to show how it originated. This is the object of the 

The Authentication of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 177G. 

Few historical events which have occasioned controversy 
are referred to definite time and place by such overwhelming 
weight of authority, personal and documentary, as that which 
assigns the authentication of the Declaration of Independence, 
by the signatures of the members of Congress, to Indepen- 
dence Hall, in Philadelphia, July 4, 1776. After it had been 
called in question, this was distinctly affirmed by two of the 
most eminent of the persons then present, one of whom was 
the author of the Declaration, and the other the most pow- 
erful advocate of the resolution on which it was based ; and 
their concurring statements appear to be corroborated by 
memoranda claimed to have been written at the time, as well 
as by the printed official Journal of the Congress of which 
both were members ; and yet it is more than probable that 
both eye-witnesses were mistaken and the memoranda unre- 
liable, while the printed Journal is demonstrably misleading. 
This is all the more extraordinary since the error relates to an 
event in respect to which error is hardty predicable. It is not 
a question as to what took place on some widely extended 
battle-field crowded with struggling combatants, but as to what 
passed directly under the eyes of fifty intelligent gentlemen in 
the quiet and secret session of the Continental Congress. 

The question is this : Was the draught of the Declaration of 
Independence, which, after various amendments, was finally 
agreed to on the afternoon of July 4, forthwith engrossed on 
paper and thereupon subscribed by all the members then pres- 
ent except Dickinson ? This is affirmed by Adams and Jeffer- 
son, and in this the printed Journal seems to sustain them. But 
this, Thomas McKean, himself a signer, present on the 4th, 
and voting for the Declaration, has explicitly denied ; and so 
have Force, 1 Bancroft, 2 Webster, 3 and Winthrop. 4 With some 

1 The Declaration of Independence, p. 63. 

2 History of the United States, vol. viii. p. 475. 

3 Works, vol. i. p. 129. 

4 Fourth of July Oration, 1876, p. 28. 



variation in phrase, these writers agree with Mr. Webster, 
who says that on the 4th " it was ordered, that copies be 
sent to the several States, and that it be proclaimed at the 
head of the army. The Declaration thus published did not 
bear the names of the members, for as yet it had not been 
signed by them. It was authenticated, like other papers of the 
Congress, by the signatures of the President and Secretary." 

Of the more recent writers, Frothingham, in his "Rise of 
the Republic " (page 545, note), and Randall, in his " Life of 
Jefferson" (vol. i. p. 171, note), unable to see their way in 
this conflict of authority, have left the matter in doubt ; 
while Dr. Lossing, who had said that " the Declaration of 
Independence was signed by John Hancock, the President of 
Congress, only, on the day of its adoption, and thus it went 
forth to the world," 1 having re-examined the question, or con- 
vinced by the statements of Mrs. Nellie Hess Morris, 2 has 
changed his opinion, and now affirms that it was engrossed 
on paper and signed on the 4th, by all the members who 
voted for it, and subsequently on parchment, and again signed 
on the 2d of August in the form well known in fac-simile. 3 

The first to challenge the commonly received opinion that 
the Declaration of Independence was engrossed, and then 
signed by the members of Congress, on July 4, was Thomas 
McKean. Shortly after Governor McKean's death, in 1817, 
John Adams sent to Hezekiah Niles eight letters, written to 
him by McKean between June 8, 1812, and June 17, 1817. 
These letters were published in Niles's " Weekly Register " 
for July 12, 1817 (vol. xii. p. 305 et seq.}. In one of them, 
dated Jan. 7, 1814, which is too long to be given in full, 
but which may be found ut supra, and also in the Collections 
of the Massachusetts Historical Society (vol. xliv. p. 505), 
Governor McKean says : — 

"On the 1st of July, 1776, the question [on the Declaration] was 
taken in committee of the whole of Congress, when Pennsylvania, 
represented by seven members then present, voted against it, four to 
three. Among the majority were Robert Morris and John Dickinson. 
Delaware (having only two present, namely, myself and Mr. Read) 
was divided. All the other States voted in favor of it. The report 

1 Field Book of the Revolution, vol. ii. p. 79. 

2 Potter's American Monthly, vols, iv.-v. p. 498. 
» Ibid., p. 754. 


was delayed until the 4th ; and in the mean time I sent an express for 
Ca3sar Rodney to Dover, in the county of Kent, in Delaware, at my 
private expense, whom I met at the State House door, on the 4th of 
July, in his boots. He resided eighty miles from the cify, and just 
arrived as Congress met. The question was taken. Delaware voted 
in favor of Independence. Pennsylvania (there being only five members 
present, Messrs. Dickinson and Morris absent) voted also for it. Messrs. 
Willing and Humphries were against it. Thus the thirteen States were 
unanimous in favor of Independence. Notwithstanding this, in the printed 
Public Journal of Congress for 1776 (vol. ii.) it appears that the Decla- 
ration of Independence was declared on the 4th of July, 1776, by the 
gentlemen whose names are there inserted, whereas no person signed 
it on that day ; and among the names there inserted, one gentleman, 
namely, George Read, Esq., was not in favor of it ; and seven were not 
in Congress on that day, namely, Messrs. Morris, Rush, Clymer, Smith, 
Taylor, and Ross, all of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Thornton, of New 
Hampshire ; nor were the six gentlemen last named, members of Con- 
gress on the 4th of July. The five for Pennsylvania were appointed 
delegates by the convention of that State on the 20th July, and Thorn- 
ton took his seat in Congress, for the first time, on the 4th November 
following; when the names of Henry Wisner, of New York, and 
Thomas McKean, of Delaware, are not printed as subscribers, though 
both were present in Congress on the 4th of July and voted for Inde- 
pendence. . . . After the 4th of July, I was not in Congress for several 
months, having marched with a regiment of Associators, as Colonel, to 
support General Washington, until the flying camp of ten thousand 
men was completed. When the Associators were discharged, I returned 
to Philadelphia, took my seat in Congress, and signed my name to the 
Declaration on parchment. '' 

In transmitting this letter to Mercy Warren for her reading, 
John Adams said : — 

" I send you a curiosity. Mr. McKean is mistaken in a day or two. 
The final vote of independence, after the last debate, was passed on the 
2d or 3d of July, and the Declaration prepared and signed on the 4th. 

" What are we to think of history, when, in less than forty years, 
such diversities appear in the memories of living persons who were 
witnesses ? 

" After noting what you please, I pray you to return the letter. I 
should like to communicate it to Gerry, Paine, and Jefferson, to stir 
up their pure minds." 

Governor McKean's recollection was certainly at fault in one 
or two particulars. His patriotic and successful endeavor to 


bring Rodney up from Delaware was that he might vote on the 
main question, — the Resolution of Independence, which passed 
the 2d of July. It is doubtful, also, whether he was correct 
in saying that Wisner, of New York, voted either for the 
resolution or for the Declaration ; for, though he may have 
been in favor of independence, the delegates from that State 
were not authorized so to vote until July 9, nor was their 
authority communicated to Congress before July 15. 1 McKean 
was in error on some collateral points ; but was John Adams 
right and McKean wrong on the main question, — the signing 
of the Declaration on the 4th ? It is premature to pronounce 
until all the evidence is produced ; but there is a noticeable 
letter, written by John Adams to Samuel Chase, from Phila- 
delphia, July 9, in which he says: "As soon as an American 
seal is prepared, I conjecture the Declaration will be subscribed 
by all the members, which will give you the opportunity you 
wish for, of transmitting your name among the votaries of in- 
dependence." 2 From this it is clear that Chase, whose name 
appears on the printed Journal of the 4th as a signer, was not 
in Philadelphia on that day, nor until after the 9th ; and a 
question arises, why Chase, on his return to Philadelphia, should 
not have signed that Declaration which John Adams says he 
and others signed on the 4th, instead of waiting for the general 
subscription, which he conjectured would take place after the 
preparation of an American seal. The following entry in the 
Journal shows that Carroll was not in Congress until after that 
date, though his name is entered on the same Journal, when 
printed, under 4th July, as then present and signing the Dec- 
laration : — 

July 18. "The delegates from Maryland laid before Congress the 

credentials of a new appointment made by their convention, which 

were read as follows : — 

" In Convention, Annapolis, July 4, 1776. 

" Resolved, That the honorable Matthew Tilghman, Esq ; and Thomas 

Johnson, Jun., William Paca, Samuel Chase, Thomas Stone , Charles 

Carrol], of Carrollton, and Robert Alexander, Esqrs. ; or a majority of 

them, or any three or more of them, be deputies to represent this colony 

in Congress, etc. etc. . . . Extract from the minutes : G. Duvall, 

Clerk." 3 

1 Journal of Congress, vol. ii. p. 265. 2 Works, vol. ix. p. 421. 

3 Journal of Congress, vol. ii. p. 273. The addition to the name of Charles 
Carroll, in the above resolve, of the words " of Carrollton," shows that such was 


But the most particular and apparently the most irrefraga- 
ble statement in favor of the popular belief that the Dec- 
laration was signed on the 4th by the members then present, 
except Dickinson, is found in Jefferson's memoranda, and also 
in his letter of May 12, 1819, to Samuel Adams Wells. 1 And 
first, the memoranda. At the end of the Declaration, on page 
21, Jefferson has appended the following : — 

" The Declaration, thus signed on the 4th, on paper, was engrossed 
on parchment, and signed again on the 2d of August." 

And in brackets : — - 

"Some erroneous statements of the proceedings on the Declaration of 
Independence having got before the public in latter times, Mr. Samuel 
A. Wells asked explanations of me, which are given in my letter to 
him of May 12, '19, before and now again referred to. I took notes 
in my place while these things were going on, and at their close wrote 
them out in form and with correctness ; and from one to seven of the 
two preceding sheets are the originals then written." 

In the margin the editor informs us that the above note 
is on a slip of paper, pasted in at the end of the Declaration. 
There is also, he tells us, sewed into the manuscript a slip 
of newspaper, containing -McKean's letter, from which it ap- 
his common designation before he signed the Declaration of Independence. 
Carroll, though he had a large property at stake, was one of the most ardent of 
the patriots, and as impatient as any of his associates at the delay of his colony 
to take the ground of independence ; and on the very day on which the printed 
Journal represents him as at Philadelphia, and signing the Declaration, he was 
at Annapolis, where he had been for some time engaged in the finally successful 
effort to bring the recalcitrant Assembly to the point of voting the resolve 
quoted in the text. Due consideration of the significance of the foregoing facts 
begets doubt respecting the story which has been widely circulated and has gained 
some credence. It is to the effect that when the members were signing the 
engrossed copy of the Declaration, August 2, Hancock, with some implied 
allusion to his own large fortune supposed to be imperilled by his signing, asked 
Carroll, who also was rich, "if he intended to sign." Perhaps there was nothing 
in the character of Hancock which would have prevented his asking such a ques- 
tion ; but certain facts stand in the way. Carroll took his seat July 18. The 
next day, Congress voted that the Declaration, when engrossed, should be signed 
by every member of that body. So that, if Carroll's patriotic efforts at Annapolis, 
which secured to himself and his delegation the right to vote, left any doubt as 
to his intention in that regard, the above vote of Congress renders the insolent 
question attributed to Hancock altogether improbable. The same may be said as 
to the alleged addition to Carroll's signature of the words " of Carrollton " in 
consequence of the taunt of a bystander that their omission might save him his 

1 Jefferson's Writings, Boston ed., 1830, vol. i. pp. 20, 94. 


pears that Jefferson intended to make an issue of fact with 
Governor McKean. 

Jefferson, in his letter to Wells, says : — 

" It was not till the 2d of July that the Declaration itself was taken 
up, nor till the 4th that it was decided ; and it was signed by every 
member present except Mr. Dickinson. The subsequent signatures of 
members who were not then present, and some of them not yet in office, 
is easily explained if we observe who they were ; to wit, that they were 
of New York and Pennsylvania. . . . Why the signature of Thornton, 
of New Hampshire, was permitted so late as the 4th of November, I 
cannot now say." 

It is important to notice that when Jefferson speaks of a 
" Declaration thus signed," he must have had before him one 
that bore the signatures of the New York and Pennsylvania 
delegates, as well as that of Thornton, of New Hampshire, as 
he mentions them. 

The letter to Wells bore date May 12, 1819. On Aug. 6, 
1822, more than three years later, he added the following 
postscript to a copy which he had preserved : — 

" Since the date of this letter, to wit, this day, August 6, '22, I have 
received the new publication of the Secret Journals of Congress, where- 
in is stated a resolution of July 19, 1776, that the Declaration passed 
on the 4th be fairly engrossed on parchment, and when engrossed, be 
signed by every member ; and another of August 2d, that being en- 
grossed and compared at the table, it was signed by the members.'* 

As neither the resolution of July 19 nor the signing on 
parchment of August 2 appear, except, as hereafter given, in 
his memoranda of matters he " took notes of in his place 
while these things were going on," and as he was certainty in 
his place August 2, when he signed the parchment Declara- 
tion, it is not surprising that he was disturbed when they came 
to his notice, nearly fifty years later, since he had apparently 
forgotten them. 

It is true he says, "The Declaration thus signed on the 4th, 
on paper, was engrossed on parchment, and signed again on 
the 2d August." The latter date shows that the entry was 
made a month after the first alleged signing. " The Dec- 
laration thus signed," to which he refers, and which he had 
before him, contained the signature of Thornton, which carries 


the date forward as late as November 4; and there is no 
evidence of the existence of a printed copy of the Declaration 
with the signatures of the members attached, before that 
issued under a resolution of Congress, Jan. 18, 1777; and the 
imprint of the official journal which contains the names of 
the signers is of the same year. From these facts it seems to 
follow that Mr. Jefferson's memoranda were made later than 
that date. 

We now proceed to a more careful examination of these 
memoranda. If they were made by Jefferson at the close of 
each day, or within a few days after the transactions they 
record, they would settle the question against any amount of 
opposing testimony of less authoritative character. But it is 
evident, on critical consideration, that such of these memo- 
randa as relate to the signing of the Declaration on the 4th of 
July were made up with the printed Public Journal before 
him ; and as that did not appear until the next year, his notes 
lose the authority of contemporaneous entries. Indeed, he 
tells us himself that the statement of facts, as we have it, was 
made up " at their close." 

It is not a little remarkable that, with the printed Journal of 
July 4, which bore Thornton's signature of November 4, before 
him, Jefferson should not have asked himself how that name 
should be found, not upon the Declaration, but upon the 
Journal of that clay. When Thornton came down from New 
Hampshire in November, he doubtless signed the parchment 
Declaration, in compliance with the order of July 19, " that 
the same, when engrossed, be signed by every member of 
Congress." Though coming late, Thornton was a member of 
that Congress. In order to make Jefferson's assumption 
effective, the clerk must then have produced the paper Dec- 
laration and requested Thornton to sign that. But neither of 
those signings would put Thornton's name on the Journal of 
the 4th. It could have come there only by the clerk's false 
entry that Thornton was present and signed on the 4th ; for 
the entries of July 4, July 19, and August 2 are in the 
handwriting of Charles Thomson. To state this supposition 
is to contradict it. Nor is Jefferson's way out of the diffi- 
culty more clear if we accept Mr. Randall's 1 solution, which 

1 Randall's Jefferson, vol. i. p. 173, note. 


seems to be adopted by Dr. Lossing, 1 that the non-appearance 
of the paper Declaration to-day is to be accounted for by 
the presumption that it was destroyed as useless when the 
parchment was signed August 2 ; for had that been the case 
Thornton's name would not have appeared on an instrument 
destroyed three months before he entered Congress. 

The real state of the case begins to appear: the printed 
Public Journal for July 4, 1776, varies from the original. There 
are three publications which purport to give the proceedings of 
the Old Congress, in whole or in part. The first is entitled 
" Journals of Congress. Containing the Proceedings in the 
year 1776." The proceedings for July, 1776, were not offi- 
cially published until more than six months after their occur- 
rence. The last entry in the Journal for that year is Decem- 
ber 31 ; and the preparation of the copy, with a full index, 
would probably delay its publication until the spring of 1777. 
For more than forty years this was the only Journal known 
to the public. It was that which Adams and Jefferson had 
before them when they so explicitly stated that the Declara- 
tion of Independence was signed by the members present, 
July 4. This printed Journal appears to sustain them in that 

The second of these Journals is entitled the " Secret Jour- 
nals of the Acts and Proceedings of Congress," and was first 
published in 1821, in four volumes, agreeably to Congressional 
Resolves. These volumes contain those records of domestic 
and foreign affairs which Congress thought wise to keep from 
the public eye, and are found in manuscript volumes. distinct 
from those which contain the Public Journals. 

The wisdom, secrecy, or timidity of Congress is clear from 
the fact that the three resolutions, one of them relating to 
independence, which Richard Henry Lee moved on the 7th 
June, 1776, are referred to in the Journal of that day only 
as " certain resolutions respecting independency ; " nor were 
they ever extended on the records, and only became known 
in the manner presently to be explained. On the 10th one of 
these resolutions was set out by way of recital. 

The third of these Journals is found in Force's " American 
Archives," which is not the Journal kept by Charles Thom- 

1 Potter's American Monthly, vols, iv.-v. p. 755. 


son, the clerk of the Old Congress, but an account of the pro- 
ceedings of Congress made up from the Journals above de- 
scribed, and the minutes, documents, and letters preserved in 
files by the clerk. It lacks the authority which appertains to 
a journal extended by a sworn clerk of the body whose pro- 
ceedings it records ; but, nevertheless, it is doubtless the most 
authentic account of the transactions of Congress which we 
possess. From the files Force printed the original paper which 
contained Lee's famous resolutions. 1 

With this account of these several Journals I now propose 
to bring them together, so far as relates to the Declaration of 
Independence. It will be understood that in speaking of the 
Journals of Congress I refer in all cases, unless otherwise 
specified, to the printed Journals. 

Proceedings according to the Public Journal. 

July 4, 1776. Agreeable to the order of the day, the Congress re- 
solved itself into a committee of the whole, to take into their farther 
consideration the declaration ; and after some time the president re- 
sumed the chair, and Mr. Harrison reported, that the committee have 
agreed to a declaration, which they desired him to report. 

The declaration being read, was agreed to, as follows : — 

A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of 
America in Congress assembled. 

\_Here follows the Declaration in the form we have it.~\ 

The foregoing declaration was, by order of Congress, engrossed, and 
signed by the following members : — 

John Hancock. Rhode Island. 

Stephen Hopkins. 
New Hampshire. William Ellery. 

Josiah Bartlett. Connecticut 

William Whipple. R Sherman . 

Matthew Thornton. Samuel Huntington . 

Massachusetts- Bay. William Williams. 

Samuel Adams. 01iver Wolcott. 
John Adams. New York. 

Robert Treat Paine. William Floyd. 

Elbridge Gerry. Philip Livingston. 

1 See fac-simile in American Archives, vol. vi. 4th ser. p. 1700. 




Francis Lewis. 
Lewis Morris. 

New Jersey. 
Richard Stockton. 
John Witherspoon. 
Francis Hopkinson. 
John Hart. 
Abraham Clark. 

Robert Morris. 
Benjamin Rush. 
Benjamin Franklin. 
John Morton. 
George Clymer. 
James Smith. 
George Taylor. 
James Wilson. 
George Ross. 

Caesar Rodney. 
George Read. 

Samuel Chase. 
William Paca. 

Thomas Stone. 

Charles Carroll, of Carrollton. 

George Wythe. 
Richard Henry Lee. 
Thomas Jefferson. 
Benjamin Harrison. 
Thomas Nelson, Jun. 
Francis Lightfoot Lee. 
Carter Braxton. 

North Carolina. 
William Hooper. 
Joseph Hewes. 
John Penn. 

South Carolina. 
Edward Rutledge. 
Thomas Heyward, Jun. 
Thomas Lynch, Jun. 
Arthur Middleton. 

Button Gwinnett. 
Lyman Hall. 
George Walton. 

Resolved, That copies of the declaration be sent to the several as- 
semblies, conventions and committees, or councils of safety, and to the 
several commanding officers of the continental troops ; that it be pro- 
claimed in each of the United States, and at the head of the army. 

In the Secret Journal there is no entry under the 4th of 
July, 1776. 

Proceedings in Congress 4:th July, 1776, as given in Force's " Archives." 1 

Agreeable to the Order of the Day, the Congress resolved itself into 
a Committee of the Whole, to take into their further consideration the 
Declaration ; and, after some time, the President resumed the chair, and 
Mr. Harrison reported, that the Committee have agreed to a Declara- 
tion, which they desired him to report. 

The Declaration being read, was agreed to, as follows : 

[Here follows the Declaration, as in the Public Journal, but witjiout 
any signatures.^ 

1 4th ser. vol. vi. p. 1729. 


Ordered, That the Declaration be authenticated and printed. That 
the committee appointed to prepare the Declaration superintend and 
correct the press. Resolved, That copies of the Declaration be sent to 
the several assemblies [etc., as in the Public Journal]. 

The Secret Journal. 

July 19, 1776. Resolved, That the Declaration passed on the 4th be 
fairly engrossed on parchment, with the title and style of " The Unan- 
imous Declaration of the thirteen United States of Amer- 
ica ;" and that the same, when engrossed, be signed by every member 
of Congress. 1 

The Public Journal has no entry on this day respecting the 
Declaration ; but the Proceedings in Force's " Archives " con- 
tain the resolve as above. 2 

The Secret Journal. 

Aug. 2, 1776. The Declaration of Independence being engrossed, 
and compared at the table, was signed by the members. 3 

The same is found in Force's " Archives," 4 but not in the 
Public Journal. 

The Public Journal. 

January 18, 1777. Ordered, That an authenticated copy of the dec- 
laration of independency, with the names of the members of Congress, 
subscribing the same, be sent to each of the United States, and they be 
desired to have the same put upon record. 5 

Assuming that the entry in the Public Journal of July 4 
is genuine, the above order is superfluous, since as such, it 
merely repeats the former order, and couples with it the ex- 
pression of a desire that the several States would record it. 
The operative clause is to print the Declaration with the 
names of the members signing it. This was accordingly done, 
and for the first time. From the copy thus printed was made 
up the Journal of the 4th July, as printed, more than six 
months antecedent. 

1 Secret Journal, Domestic Affairs, vol. ii. p. 48. 

2 Force's Archives, 5th ser. vol. i. p. 1584. 

3 Secret Journal, Domestic Affairs, vol. ii. p. 49. 

4 Force's Archives, 5th ser. vol. i. p. 1597. 
6 Journals of Congress, vol. iii. p. 28. 


With these extracts from the Journals and Proceedings be- 
fore us, and assisted by certain well-known and indisputable 
facts, it ought not to be difficult to discover the truth respect- 
ing the apparent signing of the Declaration of Independence 
on the 4th of July, 1776. 

It will be observed that the statements of these Journals 
are inconsistent, if not contradictory. The Public Journal 
says, under date of July 4 : — 

" The foregoing declaration was, by order of Congress, engrossed, and 
signed by the following members." 

In the Proceedings the corresponding entry is as follows : — 

" Ordered, That the Declaration be authenticated and printed. That 
the Committee appointed to prepare the Peclaration superintend and 
correct the press." 

" Resolved, That copies of the Declaration be sent to the several 
assemblies," etc. 

Now, it is hardly conceivable that these inconsistent orders 
could have passed at the same time and in relation to the same 
subject-matter. One or the other of them must be incorrect. 
It is noticeable that what seems to be an order in the Public 
Journal is only a narrative of an alleged fact, namely, that 
u the foregoing declaration was, by order of Congress, en- 
grossed and signed by the following members." It is perti- 
nent to ask, By what order, and where is it recorded ? The 
Journal contains no such order, nor do the files. Nothing 
exists independently of the above recital, to show that any 
such order was ever passed. Nor is the narrative a correct 
recital of facts. That is, it states what is known to be un- 
true, — in part, from subsequent entries in the Journal itself. 
The New York members, whose names are recorded as present 
and signing the Declaration on the 4th July, were not author- 
ized to sign until the 9th, nor was that authority laid before 
Congress until the 15th. Of course they did not sign before 
that date. As we have already seen, Chase was not present on 
the 4th, nor was Carroll, who did not take his seat until the 
18th. 1 Rush, Clymer, Taylor, and Ross, of Pennsylvania, 
whose names are recorded as signing on the 4th, were not 

1 Journals of Congress, vol. ii. p. 273. 


chosen delegates until July 20 ;* nor did Thornton appear in 
Congress until the 4th of November. 2 So far as these delegates 
are concerned, the Public Journal, which represents them as 
present in Congress on the 4th of July and signing the Declara- 
tion, is clearly spurious. 

In the next place, the record of the Public Journal as printed 
is at variance with known facts. If, as it asserts, the Declaration 
was signed on the 4th, it should be found in the files of that 
day ; but search has repeatedly been made for it without suc- 
cess, nor has it ever been seen or heard of. It may have been 
lost ; but there are facts making it by far more probable that 
it never existed. If the signatures of the delegates were af- 
fixed, in whole or in part, to the Declaration on the 4th, they 
formed an important part of the instrument, since they consti- 
tuted its sole authorized and required authentication, when it 
was printed and sent to the several assemblies and read at the 
head of the army. We have the copies which were so sent 
and read. But these copies contain only the signatures of 
John Hancock, as President, and Charles Thomson, as Secre- 
tary, of the Congress, who claim to have signed it in behalf 
and by order of that body. 3 So that, if the order of Congress, 
as is asserted by the Public Journal, was that the Declaration 
shonld be signed by the members, and so sent forth, then Han- 
cock and Thomson must have caused it to be printed without 
these signatures, and falsely claimed that their own were added 
by authority. For not only cannot this original Declaration, 
which Jefferson says was signed by the delegates on the 4th, 
be found, but not even one of the printed copies which were 
ordered by Congress. This fact points to an inevitable con- 
clusion. Such a paper never existed save on the false Journal 
as printed by Congress. 

On the other hand, the proceedings and orders, as set forth 
in the " American Archives," strictly conform to congressional 
precedents. All its proclamations and similar public docu- 
ments went forth under the authentication of the President 
and Secretary, unless otherwise ordered, as was the case with 
the Address to the King and other like addresses of the Con- 
gress of 1774. Any other method, save by express vote, would 
have been illegal. As the Declaration, though of the nature 

1 Journals of Congress, vol. ii. p 277. 2 Ibid., p. 441. 

8 The same authentication is given in the " Annual Register," 1776, p. 161. 


of a legislative act, was in some respects out of the ordinary 
course, the President and Secretary might well seek instruc- 
tion. Congress forthwith gave them directions to authenticate 
it and print it under direction of the committee that draughted 
it, and then send it to the assemblies and to the army. This 
was done immediately. Lossing has stated that the Declara- 
tion was agreed to about two o'clock in the afternoon. It was 
printed during that afternoon and evening, and the next day 
was sent forth to the world. 1 Copies of the Declaration are 
not rare. There is one in the library of the Historical Society; 
and a copy was printed at Salem, doubtless within a few days 
after the receipt of that distributed by order of Congress. Its 
authentication is as follows : — 

Signed by order and in behalf of the Congress, 

JOHN HANCOCK, President. 
Attest, Charles Thomson, Secretary. 

The ordinary authentication was by the signatures of the 
President and Secretary, followed by their official title ; and 
the peculiarity of the authentication of the Declaration in the 
use of the uncommon words, " Signed by order and in behalf 
of the Congress," shows that it was so authenticated by the 
express vote of that body. 

In a word, the proceedings of Congress with respect to the 
Declaration, as contained in the " American Archives," and 
given above, conform to and account for all known facts ; while 
the record of the same transaction, as found in the Public 
Journal, is contradicted by other entries in the same Journal, 
and is at variance with all the external circumstances attending 
and following the transaction. 

But the case does not rest wholly upon the reasons given 
above. Thus far in this analysis I have confined myself to 
the printed Journals of Congress, and to such facts as are of 
public notoriety ; and if the case were allowed to rest here, I 
trust it has been made to appear that the Public Journal of 
July 4, reciting that the Declaration of Independence was signed 
by the members of Congress on that day, is erroneous. But 
the error requires explanation as well as demonstration. The 

1 See note in Frothingham's "Kise of the Kepublic," p. 544, from which one 
might infer that the Declaration was published on the 4th. 


error is in the printed Journal, which does not conform to the 
original manuscripts. Of these there are three, which arc more 
fully described in the subjoined note. 1 Two of them relate to 

1 For the interesting facts given above I am indebted to the courtesy of 
S. M. Hamilton, Esq., of the State Department, Washington, who, in the ab- 
sence of Theodore F. D wight, Esq., to whom I had addressed some inquiries, 
has written the following letter, and its enclosures. 

Department of State, Washington, Nov. 5, 1884. 

Dear Sir, — . . . I fail to discover any printed half-sheet of paper, with the 
names of the members afterwards in the printed Journals, stitched in. I have 
found, however, a printed copy of the Declaration, inserted in one of the man- 
uscript Journals covering the period in question, and have, by the enclosures, 
endeavored to give an accurate idea of the same. 

Three of the manuscript Journals of the Continental Congress cover July, 
1776. One begins, or rather the first entry in it is, under date of May 25, 1776, 
and ends July 24. In this appears the printed copy of the Declaration. The 
next begins with entry under date of May 14 (continuing the record of that day, 
begun in the preceding volume), and the last Aug. 6, 1776. In that the Declara- 
tion appears as a regular and continuous entry, and is in the same handwriting 
as the rest of the Journal. The third Journal is the " Secret Domestic Journal," 
which contains no entry between June 24 and July 8, 1776. 

Taking your queries as they come in your letter, I may say, — 

1st. The enclosure gives an idea of the only printed copy of the Declaration 
inserted in any manuscript Journal. 

2d. As will be seen, the printed names of Hancock and of Thomson are the 
only names appearing attached to it in any form. 

3d. It will be seen, also, that the names of the States do not appear. 

4th. The words, " The foregoing declaration," etc. (vide printed Journal, vol. ii. 
p. 245), have not been found in the Journals, neither in the manuscript copy of 
the Declaration nor in the printed half-sheet. They (the words above quoted) 
appear in the printed Journals only. 

5th. Neither of the Public Journals nor the Secret Journal contains any written 
names to the Declaration. 

Enclosure marked No. 1 is to represent the printed half-sheet. That marked 
No. 2 is in a manner a comparison of the entries in the two Public Journals of so 
much of the minutes under the 4th of July as relates to the Declaration, with the 
exception of that part relating to copies being sent to the several States, etc. 
The copying ink denotes the entries as in the Journal containing the printed 
half-sheet ; the red ink shows them as appearing in the Journal containing the 
Declaration in manuscript : that is, the words in red ink appear in the Journal 
containing the Declaration in manuscript in addition to those in the former, while 
words in red brackets do not appear therein. 

I am, sir, very obediently yours, 

S. M. Hamilton. 
Mellen Chamberlain, Esq., etc. 

The printed page not conveniently allowing the exhibition, by type or photog- 
raphy, of Mr. Hamilton's enclosures, they may be described as follows : No. 1 is 
a folded sheet of paper designed to represent the size and form of the manuscript 
Journal which contains a printed copy of the Declaration, attached by wafers. 
The size of the sheet, when folded, is 8 by 12£ inches. On the verso of the first 


the events of July 4, and all include the Declaration of In- 
dependence in some one or more of its stages. They are all 

leaf the writing covers the upper half of the page, the lower half being left blank, 
apparently to receive by attachment the printed broadside of the Declaration now 
found there. This copy is twice folded, so as to adapt it to the page of the Journal. 
The printed matter measures 11^ by 17| inches. Its authentication is in print 
and as follows : — 

Signed by Order and in Behalf of the Congress 

JOHN HANCOCK, President 


The imprint is : " Philadelphia : Printed by John Dunlap." Above 
this printed copy of the Declaration, and forming part of the manuscript Jour- 
nal which begins with May 25 and ends July 24, 177(5, are the following entries, 
under date of July 4, 1776 : — 

"Agreeable to the order of the day the Congress resolved itself into a com- 
mittee of the whole to take into their further consideration the declaration 
" The president resumed the chair 

" Mr Harrison reported that the committee of the whole Congress have agreed 
to a Declaration which he delivered in 

" The Declaration being again read was agreed to as follows " 
[Here the printed Declaration is attached by wafers.] 

On the next page is the following : — 

" Ordered That the declaration be authenticated & printed 
"That the committee appointed to prepare the declaration superintend & 
correct the press." 

This is the true Journal of Congress for the 4th of July, omitting the order 
respecting its transmission, etc. 

Now compare this with the spurious printed Journal, and the falsity cf the 
latter clearly appears. The printed Journal reads : — 

"The foregoing declaration was, by order of Congress, engrossed, and signed 
by the following members." 

Then follow fifty-five names of gentlemen, many of whom were not members 
of Congress at that time. 

The other copy of the manuscript Journal is as follows, so far as it differs from 
the first copy ; and, as will be seen, the differences are merely verbal. This is 
found in enclosure No. 2. 

[Journal entirely in Manuscript, with the Declaration in the same Handwriting, from 

May 14 to Aug. 6, 1776. 

So much of th? minutes under 4th July as relates to the Declaration.] 

Agreeable to the order of the day the Congress resolved itself into a committee 
of the whole to take into their further consideration the declaration and after some 


at variance with the printed Public Journal, though agreeing 
with each other in all essential particulars. In neither of them 

The president resumed the chair #• 

Mr Harrison reported that the committee have agreed to a declaration, which 
they desired him to report 

The declaration heing read was agreed to as follows. 
A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of America in 
Congress assembled 

[The italicized words do not appear in the Journal to wlych is attached the 
printed copy of the Declaration.] 

Mr. Dwight has placed me under additional obligations by the following letter, 
which throws much light upon the Journals of the Old Congress ; and it is matter 
of regret that I am unable to present in this connection several valuable enclos- 
ures which he caused to be prepared. 

Depaetment of State, Washington, Dec. 23, 1884. 

As to the several Journals : Charles Thomson, as you know, was the " per- 
petual Secretary " of the Continental Congress ; and, from all I can gather, lie 
was a man of the strictest probity, and was most conscientious in the discharge of 
his important trusts. It would be interesting to discover how much influence he 
exerted in the first councils. I am confident it was considerable. To him we owe 
the preservation of all the records of the Continental Congress, — not only the 
Journals, but all those fragments now so precious, e.g., the original motions, the 
reports of committees, the small odds and ends, which are the small bones of his- 
tory. They are all in this room, and at my elbow as I write. One of them, for 
instance, is the original of Lee's motion reproduced, but without proper explana- 
tion, by Force, in the " American Archives." You allude to it. 

The Journals of Congress are, with some very few exceptions, entirely in the 
handwriting of Thomson. He seems to have been present at every session. The 
series of the archives of the Congress very properly begins with what he termed 
the " Rough Journal," beginning with the proceedings of Sept. 5, 1774, and 
ended with the entry of March 2, 1789, and was probably written while Congress 
was sitting, the entries being made directly after each vote was taken. It is 
contained in thirty-nine small foolscap folio volumes. The second of the series 
is a fair copy of the " Rough Journal," from Sept. 5, 1775, to Jan. 20, 1779, — in 
ten volumes folio. From this copy, it is stated in a record in the Bureau, "the 
Journals were printed ; and such portions as were deemed secret were marked 
or crossed by a committee of Congress, — not to be transcribed." In this he 
has amplified some entries, and given more care to the style and composition of 
his sentences. 

This explanation will account for the "two Public Journals." The "Rough 
Journal " should be regarded as the standard. No. 3 of the series of archives is 
the " Secret Domestic Journal," comprising entries from May 10, 1775, to Oct. 26, 
1787 ; the fourth number is a Secret Journal, foreign and domestic, comprising 
entries from Oct. 18, 1780, to March 29, 1786 (the foregoing two numbers form 
two volumes). No. 5 is in three volumes, and is called " Secret Journal of For- 
eign Affairs," Nov. 29, 1775, to Sept. 16, 1788. No. 6 is in three volumes, and is 
designated "An imperfect Secret Journal;" it contains entries made from the 
Journal of Congress, Sept. 17, 1776, to Sept. 16, 1788. No. 7 is a small quarto 
volume, containing but few entries, called the " More Secret Journal." No. 8 is 



is found an order for the subscription of the Declaration, 
July 4, nor any copy or account of a declaration so signed, 

a folio, secret Journal A, 1776-1783; the contents of this volume appear to be 
merely minutes of proceedings, which were afterwards entered on the Public 
Journals. (This volume does not contain any record of July 4, 1776, or any 
reference to the signing of the Declaration.) The foregoing will afford you, I 
trust, a sufficiently just idea of these invaluable records. 

The copy for the first edition of the Journals was probably prepared by Charles 
Thomson ; but lie was not responsible for the matter printed therein, as he dis- 
tinctly states on the fly-leaf of the first volume of the fair copy (No. 2 of the 
series), that the selection was made by a Committee of Congress. The responsi- 
bility' for the introduction of the names of the signers at the close of the Decla- 
ration cannot now be determined. It is entirely reasonable to suppose, however, 
that there was no intention to mislead; but that, as the names appeared in no 
other printed form, they were inserted for the information of the public. The 
Secret Journals were naturally not then suited to publication. To be sure, we 
must acknowledge that the entry of the record of engrossing and signing on the 
Secret rather than on the Public Journal, indicates that there existed some reason 
for considering these acts as of a confidential character. 

The Journals, it must be remembered, were not the accounts of an individual, 
but were the accepted records of Congress ; that then, as now, each day's pro- 
ceedings were read to that body before they obtained the authority necessary for 
their preservation. I dwell upon this in order that you may not attribute the 
discrepancies between the originals and the printed journals to the carelessness 
of a clerk or of the Secretary. In my opinion, the responsibility rests with Con- 
gress alone. 

That part of the Journal of 1776 as printed by Peter Force in the " American 
Archives " appears to me, from a hasty comparison, to be a mongrel, made up 
primarily from the first printed edition of 1777, corrected in some few particulars 
by the copy from which that edition was printed (No. 2 of the series described 
above), and punctuated and capitalized to suit his own fancy. He has in the 
punctuation and capitalization altered both the manuscript and printed ver- 
sions. The matter he appended as notes, and which seem as much a part of the 
original record as the caption and names of the signers in the printed Journal of 
1777, was taken from a variety of sources in the Archives, to which he, of course, 
had access. Mr. Sparks offended also, and was summarily criticised, for similar 
changes of the originals he printed. 

With the original of Madison's "Journal of the Debates in the Constitutional 
Convention " we have the autograph notes written out by Jefferson for Madison, 
concerning the debates on the Declaration, which Mr. Gilpin has carefully printed 
in the " Papers of James Madison" (vol. i. pp. 9-39). It might be profitable to 
compare that version with the portions of the same printed in vol. i. of the Writ- 
ings of Jefferson, and in vol. i. of Elliot's Debates. 

In view of the fact that the Secret Journal containing the record of July 19 
and August 2 was published in 1821, it seems to me very strange that the recol- 
lections of Jefferson and others should have been preferred to that veritable official 
account of the signing. 

I am very incredulous as to the existence of a signed copy of the Declaration 
prior to the engrossed copy. We have the veritable first draught in the writing 
of Jefferson, and the remains of the copy engrossed and signed on parchment 
alluded to in the Secret Journal entry of July 19. Had there been another 


nor any reference to such a paper. On the other hand, in one 
of them, which is the same as is given in the Proceedings in 
Force's "Archives," is pasted a printed copy of the Declara- 
tion, authenticated by the signatures of Hancock and Thomson, 
agreeably to the order of Congress, and is doubtless one of the 
copies printed on the night of the 4th or morning of the 5th 
of July. Had the printed Public Journal followed this manu- 
script, w T hich conforms to and explains all extrinsic facts ap- 
pertaining to the Declaration, all subsequent misapprehension 
would have been avoided. Governor McKean had special 
reasons for investigating the matter at an early date. He was 
present on the 4th, and voted for the Declaration ; but inas- 
much as it was not signed on that day, as he asserted, his name 
did not appear on the Journal, nor on the copy engrossed on 
parchment and signed August 2, since at that time he was 
away from Philadelphia, with the army. Some time later — 
Bancroft says, in 1781 — he was allowed to affix his signature 
to the engrossed copy, where it now appears. His signing in 
1781 did not affect the Journal of July 4, 1776, as Jefferson 
seems to have supposed would be the case with Thornton, and 
the New York and Pennsylvania members, who were likewise 
absent July 4. McKean's name does not appear among the 

bearing the signatures of the delegates, it is fair to suppose that the same care for 
its preservation would have been exercised as that to which we owe the other 
records and documents. It would not have invalidated the second copy. The 
actual signing of such a preliminary copy would have added no more strength to 
the action of Congress in adopting the Declaration than the entry on the Journal 
of that action, which was and is now a conclusive and binding record. It was not 
signed on the Journal; such a signing would have been a very irregular proceed- 
ing. It seems to me that a special direction to the President of Congress and to 
the Secretary to authenticate the copies sent out by order of Congress was not 
deemed necessary ; such an authentication was incident to the duties of their re- 
spective offices. The copies so sent out bear, not written, but printed signatures. 

Of that first printed broadside we have the copy wafered in the Journal, and 
another among the papers of Washington, which he read, or caused to be read, to 
the army, as mentioned in General Orders of July 9, 1776. 

As you have clearly demonstrated, but for the insertion of the names in the 
first printed Journal so as to appear a part of the record of the 4th July, all this 
mystification could not have occurred. But I repeat that the insertion is not to 
be regarded as an intention to mislead, but to enlighten, the public ; and that it 
is so printed is due to inadvertence. 

Believe me to be, my dear sir, 

Very sincerely- yours, 

Theodore F. Dwight, 
Chief of Bureau of Rolls and Library. 


signers of the Declaration of Independence, in the Journal, 
printed in 1777, nor in the edition of 1800. It is given in that 
of 1823, and possibly in some of an earlier date, which I have 
not seen. Now, at any time after 1781, if the Declaration 
were printed from the engrossed copy, it would include Mc- 
Kean's signature ; but if from the printed Journal of July 4, 
his signature would not be found. It was just this discrepancy 
between copies that led to an investigation. In the letter 
already quoted from, Governor McKean says: "In the manu- 
script Journal Mr. Pickering, then Secretary of State, and 
myself saw a printed half-sheet of paper, with the names of 
the members afterwards in the printed Journals stitched in ; " 
and in another letter, 1 June 17, 1817, he says that neither the 
manuscript of the Public Journal nor that of the Secret Jour- 
nal has any written names annexed to the Declaration. In 
this statement he is undoubtedly correct ; but apparently he 
has confounded, in the lapse of years and by the loss of 
memory, the printed copy authenticated by Hancock and 
Thomson, which is wafered to the manuscript Journal, with 
a copy bearing signatures, which does not now appear. 
Trusting to this statement of Governor McKean respecting 
the copy of the Declaration, with the signatures of the sign- 
ers, stitched into the manuscript Journal, I had supposed, 
until I received Mr. Hamilton's letter, that the falsification 
was in the record; but it now appears that it is in the printed 

As has been said, had the Public Journal, as we have it, 
been printed from the manuscript Journal, as it stands to-day, 
with the printed Declaration omitting the authenticating sig- 
natures of Plancock and Thomson, we should have a narrative 
of the proceedings on the 4th precisely as they occurred. But, 
unfortunately, it was not so printed. Published as it was, and 
as we have it, the Journal is doubtless erroneous and mislead- 
ing ; and though, at this late day, we may be unable to divine 
all the reasons which prompted the course that was pursued, 
there is no evidence of a design to falsify the record. When 
" the committee appointed to superintend the publication of 
the Journals " were empowered and instructed, by a resolve 
of Sept. 26, 1776, to employ Robert Aitkin " to reprint the 

i Portfolio, September, 1817, p. 246. 


said Journals from the beginning, with all possible expedition, 
and continue to print the same" 1 Charles Thomson probably fur- 
nished him with a copy of the proceedings of the 4th July, and 
their authority did not extend to the Secret Journal, in which 
alone was entered the resolution of July 19, for the engross- 
ment of the Declaration on parchment, and the subsequent 
signing thereof, August 2. But when they furnished copy for 
the 4th of July, they appended to the Declaration the follow- 
ing statement : "The foregoing declaration was, by order of 
Congress, engrossed, and signed by the following members." 
We infer, and have a right to infer, that the engrossment and 
signing were on July 4 ; but the printed Journal so affirms only 
by implication. All the facts stated were true at the time of 
their statement, some time subsequent to September 26. The 
error consists in throwing back to July 4 the order for engross- 
ment, of July 19, and the signing, of August 2. Any more 
specific statement of these later matters would have been a 
breach of the resolution of secrecy, which was repealed, and 
then only virtually, by a resolve, fifty years afterwards, to 
print these Secret Journals. The veil of secrecy which rested 
on the transactions of July 19 and August 2 undoubtedly 
had a tendency to refer the events of those days to July 4. 
Evidently Mr. Jefferson, one of the most intelligent and active 
participators in these events of July 19 and August 2, was 
surprised when they were recalled to his notice, in 1822, by 
the Secret Journal, which had then been published for the first 
time. Apparently, and not without reason, under these cir- 
cumstances of secrecy, every transaction relating to the Decla- 
ration of Independence had been referred, both by Jefferson 
and John Adams, to the 4th of July. For more than six months 
Congress had withheld the names of those signing the Decla- 
ration. This may have been from prudential considerations. 
Unless the Declaration was made good by arms, every party 
signing it might have been held personally responsible for an 
overt act of treason. Whether this would have been the 
case in respect to Hancock and Thomson, who were not acting 
in any personal capacity, and possibly even in opposition to 
their own convictions, in accordance with an express direction 
of Congress, may be a matter of question. But whatever may 

1 Journal, vol. ii. p. 391. 



have been their reasons, there is no doubt as to the fact that 
Congress not only sat with closed doors, and pledged their 
members to secrecy, 1 but withheld even from its Secret Jour- 
nals some of its most important proceedings. The fact has 
already been stated, in regard to this very matter of indepen- 
dence, that Congress had deemed it imprudent to extend on 
its Journals Lee's resolutions on which the battle was fought ; 
and had they not been preserved on the files, we should never 
have known their authentic form from any public record. 2 

Such are the facts respecting the signing of the Declaration 
of Independence, and the errors in the printed Journals re- 
cording the same. 3 

It is to be regretted that doubt should rest upon transac- 
tions, and the records of transactions, which are connected with 
an event so important in the history of a nation as the declara- 
tion of its independence. The printed Journal, so far as relates 

1 A fac-sirnile of the Resolution of Secrecy of Nov. 9, 1775, may be found in 
American Archives, vol. iii. 4tli ser. p. 1916. 

2 See fac-sirnile of these resolutions. Ibid., vol. vi. 4th ser. p. 1700. 

3 In the foregoing paper it has been my purpose to discuss a single question : 
Was the Declaration of Independence signed July 4 by the members of Con- 
gress ? Had my aim been more popular, I should have drawn, for more interest- 
ing particulars, upon the authorities cited in Winsor's " Handbook of the American 
Rev^Uition," p. 103 et seq., and Poole's " Index," p. 339, title " Declaration of Inde- 

The reader who has followed me in the foregoing paper may ask why neither 
Force, Webster, Bancroft, nor Winthrop has explained the matter, instead of each 
resting upon his own authority in opposition to the express statements of Jef- 
ferson and Adams, who have the support of the Journal. The answer, except 
so far as Force is concerned, is obvious : that neither the observance of propor- 
tion in a general history, nor the limits of a 4th of July oration will allow of minute 
and tedious explanations. But with respect to Force, the case is different. The 
limits of his monograph on the Declaration were not restricted. He was brought 
face to face with the question. He understood it better than any other man, and 
better than any other he could have explained the difficulty had he chosen to do 
so. He did not so choose. The trouble with him was, that his pamphlet was 
controversial. It was an attack on that part of Lord Mahon's " History of Eng- 
land," in which he gives an account of the Declaration of Independence. Follow- 
ing Jefferson and the printed Journals of Congress, Lord Mahon had said : " The 
Declaration of Independence, appearing the act of the people, was finally adopted 
and signed by every member present at the time, except only Dickinson. This 
was on the 4th of July." — History of England, vol. vi. p. 98. Force's curt answer 
to this is as follows : " The Declaration was not 'signed by every member present 
on the 4th of July,' except Mr. Dickinson." — Force's Declaration of lnd< pendence, 
p. 63. Thus he made a point against Lord Mahon on the score of accuracy. True, 
Force knew how, and by what authority, his lordship was misled. He could have 
given the explanation which would have relieved the historian ; but that was not 
his purpose. * 


to what took place on the 4th of July, 1776, is clearly untrust- 
worthy; and one of the original manuscript journals is not 
altogether accurate. When the record was extended on that 
Journal, by wafering to a page apparently left blank for the 
purpose, the printed copy of the Declaration of Independence 
authenticated by the signatures of Hancock and Thomson, it 
was made to assert facts as of the 4th of July which actually 
occurred on the 5th. The authentication and the printing of 
the Declaration were ordered on the 4th as something to be 
clone later; and should not have been entered as something 
done on that day, as the Journal affirms. Nor is this unfortu- 
nate error confined to the records. The engrossed copy of the 
Declaration which was signed on the 2d of August is made to 
say, in substance, that all the names attached to it were there 
subscribed, on the 4th of July ; and there is nothing on the 
instrument to indicate that any signatures were added on the 
2d of August, and even of a date so late as 1781, when Mc- 
Kean signed it. 

These errors are the more to be regretted, since they are 
irremediable. They must stand on the record for all time. 
The Journals, in no new edition, will be changed so as to con- 
form to the truth ; and should they be so changed they would 
lose their authority as the Journals of Congress. But though 
the record must stand, and the engrossed copy and all its 
fac-similes continue to assert that it was signed July 4, there 
can be no objection to the reconstruction of these documents, 
as matters of history, so that they shall conform to the truth. 

The several entries on the Journal which relate to the 
Declaration of Independence should read as follows: — 

"July 4, 1776. The Declaration being read, was agreed to, as fol- 
lows: [Here should appear the Declaration without any signatures, 
or authentication, as is the case with one of the manuscript Journals.] 

"Ordered, That the Declaration be authenticated and printed. That 
the committee appointed to prepare the Declaration superintend and 
correct the press, etc. 

"July 19. Resolved, That the Declaration passed on the 4th be 
fairly engrossed on parchment, with the title, etc. ; and that the same, 
when engrossed, be signed by every member of Congress. 

" Aug. 2. The Declaration agreed to on the 4th July, being en- 
grossed and compared at the table, was signed by the members, agree- 
ably to the resolution of July 19. 


"Nov. 4. The Hon. Matthew Thornton, Esq., a delegate from New 
Hampshire, attended, and produced his credentials. 

" Ordered, That Mr. Thornton be directed, agreeably to the resolve 
passed July 19, to affix his signature to the engrossed copy of the 
Declaration, with the date of his subscription. 

January 18, 1777. Ordered, That an authentic copy of the Declara- 
tion of Independence, with the names of the members of Congress sub- 
scribing the same, be sent to each of the United States, and they be 
desired to have the same put upon record. 

" , 1781. Whereas it has been made to appear to this present 

Congress that the Hon. Thomas McKean was a member of Congress 
from Delaware in the year 1776, and that, on the 4th July of that year, 
he was present and voted for the Declaration of Independence, but being 
absent with the army at the time of the general subscription of that 
instrument on the 2d of August : therefore, 

"Resolved, That the said Hon. Thomas McKean be allowed to affix 
his signature to the aforesaid Declaration, he adding thereto the date 
of such subscription." 

Such was the course pursued by McKean and other post- 
signers of the Articles of Confederation, which were agreed 
to by Congress, July 9, 1778. McKean's name is signed as 
follows : "Tho. M'Kean, Feb. 12, 1779." 

With the foregoing changes and additions the Journal of 
Congress would conform to the real transactions respecting 
the Declaration of Independence. 

The engrossed copy reads as follows : " In Congress, July 4, 
1776. The Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united 
States of America." After the Declaration follow the 
signatures. They should have been preceded by some such 
recital as the following : " The foregoing Declaration having 
been agreed to on July 4, by the delegates of the thirteen 
united colonies, in Congress assembled, and the same having 
been engrossed, is now subscribed, agreeably to a resolution 
passed July 19, by the members of Congress present this 2d 
day of August, 1776." 

Independence was announced to the world July 4, 1776. 
That is glory enough for the most insatiate of days. It needs 
not the honors of the 2d of July nor those of the 2d of August. 
On the former of these days, when Lee's resolution, " that 
these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and 
independent States ; and that all political connection between 


them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, dis- 
solved," — when this resolution was agreed to by the Congress 
on the 2d of July, the battle had been fought and the victory 
won. Two days later came the 4th, which, like all its succes- 
sors, was less the occasion of a battle than of a triumph. What 
was done on the 2d of July realized the ardent wishes of the 
patriotic party in thirteen colonies. Its consummated act was a 
notable achievement of advocacy ; and the great orator fondly 
hoped that it would be celebrated to the remotest times. 1 But 
it is otherwise. The glory of the act is overshadowed by the 
glory of its annunciation. 

The Declaration of Independence, and the true place of its 

1 John Adams, writing to Mrs. Adams from Philadelphia, 3d July, 1776, said : 
" Yesterday the greatest question was decided, which ever was debated in Amer- 
ica, and a greater, perhaps, never was nor will he decided among men. A resolu- 
tion was passed without one dissenting colony, ' that these United Colonies are, 
and of right ought to be, free and independent States,' etc. You will see in a few 
days a Declaration setting forth the causes which have impelled us to this mighty 
revolution. . . . The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable cpocha 
in the history of America. ... It ought to be commemorated, as the day of 
deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty," etc. — Works, vol. ix. 
p. 417. But it was to be otherwise. The second day of July has altogether 
passed from the memory of men. In fifty years from that time the editor of 
Niles's "Weekly Register," shortly after the death of Adams and Jefferson in 
1826, quoting the above letter, changed its date from the 3d to the 5th of July, 
and printed the passage, "the second day of July, 1776," as follows : " the Fourth 
of July, 1776, will be a memorable epoch in this history of America" ! 

Even so careful a writer as Mr. Webster fell, in his later life, into the same 
error. From the accuracy of his account of the authentication of the Declaration 
of Independence, it is evident that he had examined all that had been published 
on that subject before 1826. Nothing of value has since been added to his state- 
ment, while some of the later glosses could well be spared. — Works, vol. i. p. 129. 
But he did not undertake to explain how the confusion arose : perhaps he did not 
even know, since, when he wrote the eulogy on Adams and Jefferson, he was far 
away from the original Journals, an inspection of which alone discloses the source 
of the error. In this eulogy he has given two supposititious speeches on the reso- 
lution, July 2. That these speeches were on the resolution, and not on the 
Declaration, is evident from the opening sentence, " Let us pause ! This step, 
once taken, cannot be retraced. This resolution, once passed, will cut off all hope 
of reconciliation." — Works, vol. i. p. 132. Notwithstanding this, Mr. Webster, 
writing, in 1846, to one who had inquired respecting the authenticity of the 
speech attributed to John Adams, said : " The day after the Declaration was 
made, Mr. Adams, in writing to a friend, declared the event to be one which 
' ought to be commemorated, as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devo- 
tion to God Almighty/" — Works, vol. i. p. 150. It is needless to add that 
Adams's letter was written one day before the Declaration, instead of the day 
after, and referred to the Resolution of Independence of July 2, and not to the 
Declaration of July 4. For some account of the origin of the change of the date 
of John Adams's letter, see "Letters Addressed to his Wife," vol. i. p. 128, note. 



author in the political history of the Revolution, are interest- 
ing themes. During the preparation of this paper my own 
mind has been drawn to them, and at some future time I may 
have a word to say upon them. 

Mr. Deane presented from Mrs. Lucia Alexander, of Flor- 
ence, formerly of Boston, two samplers wrought by the sister 
and niece of Governor Hutchinson, and brought from Italy by 
Mrs. Isabella James, of Cambridge. 

William G. Russell, LL.D., and Edward J. Lowell, A.M., 
both of Boston, were elected Resident Members of the Society. 

Dr. Green presented the following paper : — 

An insurrection, known as Shays's Rebellion, broke out in 
Massachusetts during the autumn of 1786, and threatened at 
one time the most serious consequences. The causes which 
led to it were various and complicated. The disaffection was 
confined to certain counties, and in Middlesex restricted to 
the neighborhood of Groton. Many of the insurgents had 
served in the army during the Revolution, and left an honorable 
record. The chief conspirator was Daniel Shays, who had 
fought at Bunker Hill, and later in the war had worked his 
way up to a captaincy. It was their aim to redress certain 
grievances which bore heavily on the people, but they had not 
as yet learned the lesson of doing it through law and order. 
Brought up in the use of arms, they had been taught to 
remedy political evils by a resort to force. 

During the Revolutionary period heavy debts had been 
incurred, and taxes were unusually oppressive. These and 
other causes gave rise to the discontent which culminated in 
the rebellion. Many a farmer had sold his home to pay his 
notes, and the people were poor. Often the last cow or the 
last acre of land was taken to satisfy the money-lender, and 
distress was well-nigh universal. ' Northern Middlesex ap- 
pears to have had more than its share of these persecutions, 
and this may explain why the dissatisfaction in that section 
was more general than elsewhere. The Rev. Grindall Rey- 
nolds, of Concord, who a few years ago investigated the 
subject very thoroughly, informs me that, in 1784 and the two 
succeeding years, every fourth man in Groton, if not everjr 
third, was subjected to one, two, three, or a dozen suits for 


debt. Hardships like these would surely produce a feeling of 
resentment in any community. Mr. Reynolds gives me the 
following facts, gathered from manuscripts among the State 
Archives, which show that the uprising in Middlesex was due 
to four or five towns only. When the oath of allegiance was 
administered to those who had taken part in the mobs, there 
were 107 from Groton who took it, 67 from Townsend, 62 
from Shirley, 39 from Pepperell, 10 from Westford, 8 from 
Ashby ; while there was only one each from Framingham and 
Chelmsford, and none from the other thirty-three towns in the 

" The first mutterings of discontent were heard in 1784, 
when Groton and Shirley appointed delegates to meet with 
other towns," says Mr. Reynolds, in Drake's " History of Mid- 
dlesex County" (vol. i. p. S92) ; but beyond this I find no 
record to show what was then done, or even whether the con- 
vention was held. Two years later, another attempt was 
made to give form and shape to the spirit of dissatisfaction 
at that time prevalent in northern Middlesex. Unfortunately, 
a majority of the voters in Groton were in sympathy with this 
movement ; and they petitioned the selectmen to call a town- 
meeting, and dictated the articles to be considered. The 
selectmen, though not approving of the measures, complied 
with the request, and issued the following warrant, as appears 
from the town records : — 

June 1786. 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Middlesex ss. 

To Joseph Moors Esq!" one of the Constables of the Town of Groton 
in said County Greeting 

You are hereby required to Notify & warn the freeholders & other 
Inhabitants of the said Town Qualafied by Law to vote in Town affairs 
(as are named on the list hereunto annexed,) to assemble and meet 
at the publick meeting house in said Town on Tuesday next [June 
27], Nine o'clock before noon, in Consequence of the following request 
Signed by Sixty Eight persons and to act on the Several articles 
therein contained, which request is as followeth viz 

To the Gentlemen Selectmen of the Town of Groton, we the Lawful 
& legal voters of said Town Humbly request that a Town meeting may 
be called as Soon as possible and Insert the following articles in your 
Warrent Viz. 

First, to Choose a moderator to regulate si meeting. 


2 ly to Choose a man Suitable to take a Copy of the Votes in s** 

3 ly To Choose a Committee to Correspond with the other Committees 
of any Towns in this Commonwealth Relative to our publick Grie- 
vances and that s^ Committees Draw up a Petition to lay before the 
General Court for a redress of the same. 

4 ly to See if the Town will Give s^ Com 1 ! 6 Instructions relative to 
their proceedings. 

5 ,y To See if the Town will Vote that the General Court be removed 
out of Boston. 

6 ly To See if the Town will Vote not to have any Inferior Court 

7 ly To See if the Town will Vote not to have more than one attorney 
in a County to Draw writs & that he is paid the Same as the States 

8 ly To See if the Town will Vote that there be a stop put to all Law 
Suits of a Civil nature untill there is a Greater Circulation of money 
than there is at present 

9 ly to see if the Town will Vote that there be a bank of paper money 
made sufficient to pay our foreign Debts and to cliose a committee to 
Receive the produce of our land at a Reasonable price in Exchange for 
s^ money and export the same to foreign Parts for money & Bills of 
Exchange or other Articles Equal to the same that will Discharge s d 
Debts and also another Bank to pay our Domestlck Debts. 

10 ,y To see if the Town will Vote that the S^ paper money be 
Received in all payments Equal to Gold & Silver and he that Refuses 
to Take the same shall Loose his Debt. 

ll ly To see if the Town will Vote that all Bonds and notes or other 
Debts be Discharged by them that they were first Contracted with or 
given to or their Heirs & c . and that S d Creditors shall make Discharge 
of s d Debts if a lawfull tender be made. 

12 ly To see if the Town will Vote that there Shall be no Distress 
made by any Constable Sheriff for Rates or other Debts untill there is 
a greater Circulation of money then at present. 

13 ly to see if the Vote that the First holders of publick Securities 
shall draw their full sum & interest and all those that have purchased 
s* Securities Shall give in on oath what they gave for the same and 
Shall Receive no more of the publick Treasurer Including Interest. 

14 ly To see if the Town will Vote to open our Ports to all nations 
that a free trade may commence to the Good of the Community at large. 

15 ,y To see if the Town will Vote to Chose a Committee of safety 
to see that there is no more Infringements made on our Injured Rights 
and previledges — and act [on] any thing Relative to the above Articles 
or any other things which may be Necessary for the good of the Publick 
at Large. 




Benj? Page 
Eph™ Ward 
Stephen Munroe 
Jabez Holden 
Eben Tarbell 
Jolin Moors 
Amos Stone 
John Park 
Eben r Parnsworth 
Jonas Stone 
Jon a Stone 
Asa Stone 
Thomas Hubbard 
Jon^ Lawrence 
Robart Ames 
Amos Ames 
Oliver Shed 
John Piske 
Asahel Wyman 
Joh Sartell 
Jonathan Piske 
Amos Lawrence 
Enoch Cook 

Peletiah Pussell 
Thomas Par well 
Richard Sawtell 
Samuel Kemp Jr. 
Ephraim Kemp 
Amos Adams 
Caleb Blood 
Benj a Tarbell 
Sam 1 . Hemenway 
Zech^ Pitch 
James Shiple 
Joseph Shed 
Oliver Pletcher 
Josiah Hobart 
Oliver Parker 
Royal Blood 
Phinehas Parker 
Jon a Worster 
Ephraim Nutting 
James Wood 
Nath 11 Sartell 
Jacob Patch 
Sam 11 Chamberlin 

David Woods 
John Woods 
Benj? Ilazcn 
Jason Williams 
Daniel Williams 
Jacob Williams 
Shattuck Blood 
David Blodget 
James Bennet 
Isaac Lakin 
Sam 11 Ilartwell 

John X Lawrance 


John Gragg 
Job Shattuck 
Job Shattuck Jr. 
Benj a Lawrance 
Samuel Gragg 
Jacob Lakin Parker 
Jacob Gragg 
Oliver Blood 
Levi Kemp 
Timothy Woods 

And you are to make return of this Warrant with your doings therein 
to the Town Clerk of said Town or to some one of the Selectmen of the 
s* Town by Tuesday next [June 27,] at Eight o Clock beforenoon 
hereof you will not fail at the peril of the Law. Given under my hand 
& seal this 24^ day of June A. D. 1786. 

By order of the Selectmen of said Town. 

Isaac Farnsworth Town Clerk 

These several articles were referred to a committee, chosen 
at the meeting", consisting of Dr. Benjamin Morse, Captain Job 
Shattuck, Ensign Moses Chilcls, Captain Asa Lawrence, and 
Captain Zechariah Fitch, to whom " Discretionary power " was 
given to act as they thought best. They were requested to 
correspond with the committees of other towns in the Com- 
monwealth, in relation to their public grievances, and to peti- 
tion the General Court for redress. 

The "request" contained in the warrant shows clearly the 
utter want of appreciation of the true causes of their troubles, 
on the part of the signers, as well as the proper remedies for 
relief. Their political notions were crude in the extreme, and 
in some respects agree well with the views of those who now 
advocate free trade and fiat money. 

Committees from Groton, Pepperell, Shirley > Townsend, and 


Ashby met at Groton on June 29, 1786, two days after the 
town-meeting, in order to make preparations for calling a 
county convention. At this preliminary meeting a committee 
was appointed, of which Captain John Nutting, of Pepperell, 
was the chairman, who addressed a circular letter to the select- 
men of the other towns in Middlesex County. They were 
invited to send delegates to a convention, to be holden at 
Concord, " to consult on matters of public grievances and 
embarrassments, and devise a remedy therefor." At Newton 
a town-meeting was held expressly for the purpose of consid- 
ering this letter, when a veiy sharp and decisive answer was 
sent by that town to Captain Nutting, declining to take part 
in the affair. Extracts from the reply are found in Francis 
Jackson's " History of Newton " (pp. 211-213): 

The county convention was afterward held at Concord, on 
August 23, — the immediate result of the meeting of the town 
committees at Groton. Its object was to consult on public 
grievances; and one such grievance was the Court of Common 
Pleas, which was to sit on the 12th of the following month. 
The malcontents felt a special spite against this court, some- 
times called the Inferior Court, as it was the principal source 
of the executions by which property was sold to satisfy the 
demands of the tax-gatherer. The convention voted ten arti- 
cles of grievance, and adopted an address to the public, which 
was ordered to be printed, when it adjourned to meet again on 
the first Tuesday of October. 

Trouble was now feared, and means were taken to prevent it. 
But notwithstanding these measures, a mob of about a hun- 
dred men from Groton and its neighborhood, under the com- 
mand of Job Shattuck, assembled at Concord, on the afternoon 
of September 12, in order to prevent the session of the court. 
They lodged that night in the court-house, and under such other 
temporary shelter as they could find, and on the next day took 
possession of the ground in front of the court-house. Strength- 
ened by considerable accessions to their numbers, they suc- 
ceeded in their aim so far as to prevent the sitting of the 
court ; and this produced a great excitement, not only in Mid- 
dlesex, but throughout the State. Flushed with success, the 
rioters were now determined to suppress the session of the 
court to be held at Cambridge on November 28, though some 
of them were inclined to go no further against the govern- 


ment, but in this were overruled by the leaders. As UK- 
day drew near, there were unpleasant rumors of a probable 

collision between the authorities and the rebels, and due care 
was taken to avert it. The show of strength on the part of 
the government, and the want of discipline among the insur- 
gents, prevented the disaster. 

John Quincy Adams, then a young man in college, writes 
in his journal, under the date of November 27, 1786, — as 
quoted by the Hon. Charles Francis Adams in his Phi Beta 
Kappa address, at Cambridge, on June 26, 1873 : — 

" This evening, just before prayers, about forty horsemen arrived here, 
under the command of Judge [Oliver] Prescott, of Groton, in order to 
protect the court to-morrow from the rioters. We hear of nothing hut 
Shays and Shattuck. Two of the most despicable characters in the 
community now make themselves of great consequence." (Page G.) 

General John Brooks, afterward the Governor of the Com- 
monwealth, writes from Medford, under the date of November 
27, 1786, to Commissaiy-Ceneral Richard Devens, that " one 
hundred Volunteers are expected in this town every moment 
from Groton to support the Court at Cambridge tomorrow." 2 
This is, undoubtedly, an allusion to the force under Judge 
Prescott, who was a prominent military character in the 
county. He had previously held in the militia the respective 
commissions of major, lieutenant-colonel, colonel, brigadier- 
general, and major-general. 

On November 27 a small party of insurgents, headed by 
Oliver Parker, of Groton, marched into Concord, on their 
way to Cambridge with the intention of suppressing the court. 
This movement created fresh excitement, as the Middlesex 
leaders had indeed promised to remain quiet, and their appear- 
ance now was quite unexpected. Job Shattuck joined them 
later, coming in a more secret manner. It was intended that 
he should have command of the party, and act with the rebel 
force from Worcester County ; but, owing to some want of 
co-operation between them, their plan fell through. At this 
failure the ringleaders became disheartened and scattered, 
when most of them returned to their homes. Warrants 
were at once issued for the arrest of the principal offenders. 

1 Mass. Archives, vol. clxxxix. p. 35. 


Executive action was based on the following communica- 
tion : : — 

To the Governor and Council of Massachusetts 

I hereby certify that Job Shattuck & Oliver Parker Gentlemen & 
Benj a - Page Yeoman all of Groton & Nathan Smith & John Kelsey of 
Shirley Gentlemen, all in the County of Middlesex & Commonwealth 
aforesaid have been active in the late rebellion & stirring up the people 
to oppose Government, are therefore dangerous persons & pray a War- 
rant may be .issued to restrain them of their personal Liberty. 

Oliver Prescott. 

Boston Nov 1 : 28* h 1786 

A company of horsemen, under the command of Colonel 
Benjamin Hichborn, aided by another party under Captain 
Henry Woods, of Pepperell, was sent from Boston to secure 
the subjects of the warrant. 

George R. Minot, in " The History of the Insurrection in 
Massachusetts" (pp. 77-79), gives the following account of 
the affair : — 

" The execution of these warrants was committed to the Sheriff of 
Middlesex [Loammi Baldwin], and others, to whose aid, a party of horse, 
who had voluntarily associated for the support of government, under 
Colonel Benjamin Hichburn, was ordered from Boston, early in the 
morning of [Wednesday] the 29th of November. They were joined by 
a party from Groton, under the command of Colonel Henry Wood, and 
the whole consisting of more than 100, proceeded immediately for Con- 
cord. On their arrival there, the Groton horse, as being best acquainted 
with the country, and least liable to excite an alarm from an unfa- 
miliar appearance to the inhabitants, were despatched to secure the 
subjects of the warrant. These returned at night, with two prisoners, 
Parker and Page, but Shattuck, the principal leader, had taken an 
alarm and escaped. Under this disappointment, at midnight, in the 
midst of a violent snow storm, the whole party were ordered on to 
Shattuck' s house in Groton, where they did not arrive till late in the 
morning. Here they found that Shattuck had fled to the woods. A 
search was immediately commenced, and a judicious pursuit discovered 
him to a party of a few persons, led by Colonel Wood himself. Shattuck 
obstinately resisted, and was not taken until he had received several 
wounds, one of which was exceedingly dangerous, and which he re- 
turned, though without much injury. The three principal objects of the 
warrant being thus apprehended, the party returned to Boston, on the 

1 Mass. Archives, vol. clxxxix. p. 40. 


next day but one after their departure, having pervaded the country for 
near fifty miles. The short time in which this excursion was performed 
with so large a body, and the extreme severity of the weather, ren- 
dered the execution of this service as honourable to the gentlemen who 
subjected themselves to it, as their motives in the undertaking were 

Job Shattuck lived near Wattle's Pond, in a house which 
he built about the year 1782, still standing, and occupied by 
Harrison Holmes when the map in Mr. Butler's History was 
made. He is supposed to have passed the night before his 
arrest at the house of Samuel Gragg, two miles away from 
his own dwelling. When the company failed to find him at his 
home on the morning of Thursday, November 30, twelve men, 
under Sampson Reed, of Boston, proceeded at once to Gragg's 
residence, where there was reason to think he was hiding. 
They learned that he had been there, but had just left ; and 
by the tracks in a light snow which had fallen during the 
previous night, they traced him to the neighborhood of his 
own house. Here he was taken by his pursuers, after a des- 
perate resistance, on the banks of the Nashua River, almost 
within sight of his dwelling. A blow from the broadsword of 
F. C. Varnum, of Boston, made a fearful wound in Shattuck's 
knee, dividing the capsular ligament. 

Another account of the arrests is found in "The Massachu- 
setts Gazette," December 5, 1786, as follows: — 

"We have the pleasure of announcing to the publick the very agree- 
able and authentick information of the safe return of the corps of 
volunteer horse, under the command of Col. Hichborn, after having 
achieved the object of their expedition, by the capture of Shattucl, 
Parker and Page, who have been the indefatigable fomenters of 
sedition in the county of Middlesex. 

" Too much credit cannot be given the officers and men on this occa- 
sion, who performed a long and disagreeable march, a great part of the 
way in the night, in a heavy snow-storm, and in a very short period. — 
The people every where in the country, through which they passed, so 
far from the opposition which the rioters threatened, cheerfully gave 
them every assistance that was wanted. A company of horse, under 
Col. Wood, of Pepperell, were particularly active, and had the honour 
of securing two of the prisoners before the party arrived at Groton. — 
Shattuck, however, had found the means of eluding their vigilance — 
but upon the arrival of the troop in the vicinity of his house, a second 



search commenced with renewed ardour — until he was finally discovered, 
pursued and apprehended — though not without a sharp conflict with 
one of the horse, in which much personal bravery was displayed — but 
upon two others coming up, he was obliged to surrender. — Shattuck was 
badly wounded in the knee, and the gentleman immediately engaged 
received a slight cut on his face. — These deluded and daring violaters 
of the publick peace had been in arms the day before in Concord, on 
their way to Cambridge, to stop the Court of Common Pleas, which is 
now sitting unmolested in that town. 

"The most absurd and contradictory stories have been circulated 
throughout the country ; and it may be truly said, that they have sup- 
ported a bad cause by the most scandalous deception, as well to their 
own strength, as to the views of government. 

" Every body joins in giving praise to the volunteers, who have done 
honour to their characters, and rendered the most essential benefit to 
the State by this achievement. 

" Groton is about 43 [33 ?] miles from this town, so that what with 
the direct course, and the chase which they had before the seizure of 
Shattuck, who immediately fled to the woods, upon being discovered 
behind a barn, many of the company must have rode near one hundred 
miles from Wednesday morning to Thursday evening, and were some 
of them nine hours on horse-back, without scarcely dismounting in that 
time. There was not a gun fired at the horse, in the whole expedition, 
though it was generally believed that Shattuck had fortified his house 
in order to a vigorous opposition: This, however, proved not to be 
the case, for he had endeavoured to abscond, after trying in vain to 
raise a party for his protection. — The troop went in aid of the Sher- 
iff, by order of his Excellency, when it was found that the late am- 
nesty of government was without effect, in reclaiming these hardened 

Captain Shattuck was carried to Boston on December !, and 
committed to jail with Page and Parker, though these last two 
were soon afterward released on bail. Page's liberation was 
due, doubtless, to the following letter from Judge Oliver Pres- 
cott, one of the selectmen at that time : x — 

Groton Jany. I s * 1787. 
Sir Mr Benj? Page the State Prisoner with his Wife, beggs to 
know of your Excellency, whither he can be admitted to Bail before 
the sitting of the General Court ; as he has a large young Family suf- 
fering by his absence. Mf Page is a man of property & Mess? Joseph 

1 Mass. Archives, vol. clxxxix. p. 67. 


Allen & Jonathan Lawrence of Groton, men of property, will appear 
as sureties. Mr Levi Kemp the bearer, went with s? Page on the "27 th 
of Novf last, to Carry a Letter from the Malcontents, to Capt. Pratt in 
Bristol County, & will inform you of their Conduct in that Journey. 
Your Excellency will be pleased to inform MF Kemp whither Page 
can be admitted to Bail, & what are the necessary requisites for that 

I have the honor to be, with the most perfect Esteem, 

Your Excellencies most Obedient, Hum! Servant ; 

Oliver Prescott. 
The Governor. 

While in confinement Shattuck was treated kindly, and 
had the best of medical skill. " The Massachusetts Gazette," 
December 12, says : — 

" Shattuck, the state prisoner now in this town, is amply provided 
with all the necessaries and conveniences proper for any person labour- 
ing under such a wound, as he received in his violent and obstinate 
resistance to the gentlemen who apprehended him ; he is constantly 
attended by a number of respectable gentlemen of the Faculty, and 
treated with all the humanity that could possibly be shewn to any person 

He remained in jail more than four months, but was finally 
released on April 6, under bonds of £200, and allowed to return 
to his family. The following letter relating to his son is on 
file: 1 — 

Groton Jan? 9 l . h 1787 

Sir Job Shattuck JuT son of Capt. Shattuck the State Prisoner, ear- 
nestly requests -your Excellency*? permission to see his Father. —he 
hath been in Arms twice ; & after his father was apprehended absconded 
& went into the Western Counties, but after his return came & Volun- 
tarily took the oath of Allegiance a Certificate of which I have sent to 
the Secretary? office, & believe he will be a good Subject & I desire he 
may be allowed to return to his Family & Business. He will give an 
account of his discoveries in his Journey if interrogated. 

I have the honor to be with the most perfect Esteem & respect, 

Your Excellency? most Ob* Hie S* 

Oliver Prescott. 
The Governor. 

1 Mass. Archives, vol. clxxxix. p. 71. 


The following account of Shattuck's wounds is found in 
" The Massachusetts Gazette," January 5, 1787 : — 

" As the curiosity of the publick has been excited by the situation of 
Job Shattuclc, now confined in the jail ■ in this town ; and as it is not 
improbable his real condition may have been wilfully misrepresented 
in different parts of the country, it is thought expedient to publish the 
following, which may be relied on as a true state of facts. 

" About 10 o'clock in the morning of the 30th of November, he was 
overtaken by a party of the posse who attended the Sheriff. Being 
armed with a broad sword, he assaulted the party, and before he could 
be made a prisoner, and disarmed, he received several slight cuts in his 
face and hands, and a wound in the joint of bis right knee, from a broad 
sword. His hands and face were soon healed. 

" By the wound in the knee, the capsular ligament was divided in an 
oblique direction, on the anteriour and external part. As soon as he 
could be brought to an house, his wounds were dressed ; and as he was 
to be conveyed immediately to Boston, it was judged expedient to close 
the gaping wound by three stitches through the cellular membrane. In 
this state he was conveyed to town in a sleigh, the most easy mode of 
conveyance at this season of the year. On the first of December, he 
was lodged in Boston jail. Having lain a few hours in a room on the 
first floor, he was removed on the same day into an upper-chamber, 
warm and comfortable, with a good fire-place, and capable of free ven- 
tilation, a room usually appropriated for debtors, and accommodated with 
glass-windows, where he was provided with suitable bedding, fireing, 
and a faithful nurse, and every other necessary, attended by a number 
of the faculty of the v town. 

"The great degree of inflammation usually brought on by a wound 
on this part, and of such a nature, was in a considerable degree pre- 
vented by bleeding, cooling medicines, anodyne and sedative applica- 
tions, and by keeping the limb in an easy posture, and for the first 
week, the wound wore as favourable an appearance as, from the nature 
of it, could be expected. 

"A degree of pain and inflammation, however, continued, particularly 
on the external and upper part of the joint; and on Friday the 8th 
December, it was found necessary to open a sinus which had formed 
from the upper lip of the wound, and a little above the joint, which 
discharged a considerable quantity of matter. Notwithstanding this 
discharge, and the constant use of antiphlogistick applications, and a 
total abstinence from animal food, and every thing of a spirituous kind, 
and inflammation of all the parts about the joint continued, and did not 
begin to subside until Tuesday the 12th, when they became less turgid, 
and the wound, with the parts adjacent, assumed a more agreeable as- 


pect, the matter discharged was of a good quality, the patient was in 
general free from pain, rested well at night, and discovered that incli- 
nation for food which proves the system to be at ease. 

" The inflammation having now subsided, it was thought proper to 
give the bark and wine, in order 'to restore the strength of the patient, 
which had been much impaired by the fever and discharges of matter ; 
and there was a pleasure in observing the agreeable appearance and im- 
provement of the wound from day to day under this course. His recov- 
ery was evident, not only to the gentlemen who attended him, but was 
experienced by the patient, and drew from him his approbation and 

" Notwithstanding these promising circumstances, he was indulged, 
by government, in the privilege, enjoyed by every other citizen, to 
choose his own physician and surgeon, and, according to his own request, 
was delivered into the care of Mr. Kitteredge, of Tewksbury, on 
Wednesday the 20th ; since which time, neither of the gentlemen, who 
had attended, have seen him, or been consulted in his case. 

<; [It is to be remarked, that the patient at this time acknowledged, 
and Mr. Kitteredge declared the wound to be in good order, and that 
it * run good matter.'] " 

"The Massachusetts Gazette," January 26, 1787, announces 
that — 

" A report having been circulated in the country, that Mr. Shattuck, 
one of the state prisoners, had died in jail, it is proper to inform the 
publick, that he was last evening as well as he has been for three weeks 
past ; and that his recovery is not improbable." 

In the month of May, Captain Shattuck was tried and con- 
victed before the Supreme Judicial Court, and sentenced to 
be hanged on June 28 ; but, the day before this, a reprieve 
was granted to July 26 ; then, on the day preceding this, the 
execution of the sentence was again postponed to September 20, 
but on the 12th of that month he received a full and uncondi- 
tional pardon. 

Job Shattuck's life was one of large experiences. He was 
bom on February 11, 1736, and at the early age of nineteen 
took part in the French War, serving through the campaign of 
1755 under General Monckton in Nova Scotia; and later he 
was present at the battle of Bunker Hill. In the year 1776 
he was lieutenant of a company that went to Boston after 
that town was evacuated by the British, and the next year 
he commanded a company raised in Groton, that marched to 


Fort Ticonderoga. During the whole period of the Revolu- 
tion he gave freely of his time and money to promote the 
popular cause. 

In the autumn of 1781, ShattuQk was engaged in what were 
then known as the Groton riots, incited by the opposition to 
the silver-money tax. He and sixteen other citizens of the 
town threatened and bullied William Nutting and Benjamin 
Stone, while attending to their duties as constables in collect- 
ing taxes. It was an affair that created a good deal of excite- 
ment in its day. At the trial he pleaded guilty, and was 
fined £10 and the cost of prosecution. 

It is but just to the memory of Captain Shattuck to say 
that he was a member of the church and much respected by 
his townsmen. At the time of the rebellion he was near the 
middle age of life, and a man of great bodily vigor. He was 
the son of a respectable farmer, and himself a large land- 
owner. Strong and athletic in person, skilled in the use of 
the broadsword and proud of the accomplishment, utterly 
insensible to fear and having a good war-record, — all these 
qualities, aided by his position and means, gave him great 
influence among his neighbors. He paid dearly for his errors, 
as the crutch which he used until the day of his death, January 
13, 1819, would testify; and we can well afford to be charitable 
now to the poor misguided men who took part in that needless 
and wicked rebellion. 

It should not be supposed, however, that the whole town of 
Groton sympathized with the insurrectionary proceedings, as 
there were many law-abiding citizens still remaining. The 
following extract is taken from " The Massachusetts Gazette," 
December 12, 1786 : — 

" It may serve, says a correspondent, to give information to the pub- 
lick, with respect to the importance of the mob in Middlesex, to know, 
that all the independent farmers, and all the sober, thinking people 
in that county, discovered the highest approbation of the measures 
lately taken to put a stop to all future tumults there ; hoping, as 
they declared, that they should now hear and suffer no more from 
such infamous doings, and that the neck of sedition was broken. The 
people of Groton provided every refreshment, for the men and horse 
who went out to apprehend the leaders of the mob, and refused to 
receive one farthing's recompence, though ample pay was urged upou 


During the period of Shays's Rebellion Groton was one of 
the three towns in Middlesex County where the Court of Com- 
mon Pleas used to sit, Cambridge and Concord being the other 
two. In the spring of 1787 its sessions were removed by an 
act of the Legislature, presumably on account of the part 
taken by the town in this uprising. 

In the year 1835 there was published anonymously at Phil- 
adelphia, a work entitled " The Insurgents : An Historical 
Novel," in two volumes. It is based on Shays's Rebellion, 
and the scene is laid mainly in the Connecticut valley. In the 
second volume is an account of Shattuck's capture, which is 
given with all the freedom of a novelist's pen. 

During the excitement of the rebellion Aaron Brown's pot- 
ash works at Groton were burned, on November 30, by some 
of the insurgents. Brown was one of the two constables who 
served the warrants against the leaders on that very day, and 
the feeling toward him was bitter. The establishment was 
situated on the south side of the Broad Meadow road, near 
the village, just before you come to the meadow. " The Mas- 
sachusetts Gazette," December 8, says : — 

"On Thursday night [November 30], last week, the Pot- Ash works 
belonging to Mr. Brown, of Groton, together with several tuns of Pot- 
Ashes, were destroyed by fire. The loss to Mr. Brown is very consid- 
erable ; and we are well informed, that there is great reason to conclude 
it was occasioned by the malice of one or more of the insurgents belong- 
ing to Middlesex." 

It appears from the General Court Records (vol. xlvii. 
p. 426), May 1, 1787, that Mr. Brown subsequently received 
some compensation for his losses. The entry is as follows : — 

In the House of Representatives . . . Whereas Aaron Brown of 
Groton has represented to this Court, that his pot and pearl ash works 
were destroyed by fire, and also exhibited evidence which affords good 
reason to believe that the same were destroyed by some unknown and 
wicked incendiary, in consequence of his great exertions in the support 
of good Government. 

And whereas it is incumbent on the Legislature of this Common- 
wealth, to encourage the manufacture of pot & pearl ash, as well as 
to provide, as far as consistently may be, that no person shall suffer 
injury in consequence of his exertions to support and defend the 
Government : ■ — 


Resolved That there be paid out of the Treasury of this Common- 
wealth to Aaron Brown from the money arising from the fines which 
are or shall be paid by persons who have been or shall be convicted of 
beiug concerned in the late rebellion, the sum of one hundred pounds, 
to enable him to rebuild his pot and pearl ash works — Provided not- 
withstanding if the said Brown shall hereafter discover the perpetra- 
tors of the aforesaid wicked act, and shall recover the damage he has 
sustained, he shall in that case repay the said sum of one hundred 
pounds, into the Treasury, taking duplicate receipts, one of which he 
shall lodge in the Secretary's office. 

In Senate read & concurred 

Approved by the Governor 

The works were subsequently re-established on the same 
site, and the building was standing as late as 1820. Some of 
the old iron kettles, used in the manufacture of potash, were 
lying behind Major Gardner's store at a period many years 

Mr. A. B. Ellis introduced the following communication 
from Dr. Estes Howe, of Cambridge, in regard to the abode of 
John Hull and Samuel Sewall : — 

Charles Deane, Esq. 

Dear Sir, — As I said to you some time since that I thought the 
editors of Sewall's Diary had fallen, notwithstanding the great eare 
with which their work has been done, into an error as to the place of 
residence of John Hull, I have given a considerable amount of time to 
the investigation of the facts, and I am satisfied that John Hull never 
lived at Cotton Hill, and propose to point out the proof. 

Robert Hull, the father of John, arrived in Boston Nov. 7, 1635. 
He was admitted a freeman March 9, 1637. He had a house-lot and 
"great allotment" as early as December, 1636. He was one of the 
Antinomians who were disarmed Nov. 20, 1637. His house-lot is de- 
scribed in the " Book of Possessions " as " one house and garden bounded 
with John Hurd South, the High Street West, Job Judkin North and 
Gamaliel Waite East." This lot lay on the easterly side of Washing- 
ton Street, formerly Newbury Street, between Summer and Bedford 
Streets. The lots, by the " Book of Possessions," were six in num- 
ber between these two streets. Beginning at the north, the first lot 
was Elizabeth Purton's, afterwards Robert Noone's ; second lot, Job 
Judkin's ; third, Robert Hull's; fourth, John Kurd's; fifth, William 
Plantayne's, or Blanton's ; sixth, Thomas Wheeler's. The lots were 
proximately four rods wide and sixteen rods deep. 


The first four lots were bounded on the east by the garden plot of 
Gamaliel Waite ; the sixth, Wheeler's, was bounded on " the watering 
place," afterwards called " Wheeler's Pond," and the street " Pond 
Street." This lot of Gamaliel Waite's was his garden lot; his house 
was on the north side of Summer Street. The garden lot is still owned 
in one piece, and is now covered by the stone block occupied by C. F. 
Hovey & Co., owned by George Gardner, Esq. The surroundings as 
here described become important in future memoranda. 

John Hull, born Dec. 18, 1624, came over with his father, and landed 
Nov. 7, 1635. In December, 1646, Robert Hull made a deed of gift to 
John for his " love and affection, especially being now upon his marriage 
about the one and twentieth year of his age " (he was twenty-two, and 
the mistake is singular: the deed seems to be in John Hull's writing; 
but the date is erroneous, — in the record being 1656, while the original 
is 1646). The description is in these words : "My dwelling house and 
garden, with all the fruit trees and appurtenances, bounded north with 
the land of Job Judkin ; on the south with land of John Hurd ; on the 
east with Gamaliel Waite ; on the north west with the highway ; only 
reserving unto myself during my life a free and full enjoyment of it." 

John PIull was married to Judith Quincy, May 11, 1647. Robert 
Hull died July 28, 1666, and his will was probated February, 1667. 1 
With the will the deed cited above was produced and approved, having 
never before been recorded. The will says : " I do give to my son 
John Hull my part of this house which was first built and the orchard 
and garden with all the appurtenances to it." From this the inference 
seems to be strong that John had added to his father's house, and lived 
under the same roof with him. Ten years after his father's death, in 
November, 1676, he bought from Samuel Judkins, son of Job, who 
also joined in the deed, a house and land next northerly of his own, 2 
" thirty-one feet in front on the Town way, thirty-three feet, eight inches 
at the other end abutting upon Gamaliel Waite eastward, on John Hull 
southward." June 30, 1683, three months before his death, he bought 
of Edward Rawson a lot of land on Summer Street, being the easterly 
end of Widow Purton's lot, one hundred feet on Summer Street and 
sixty feet deep, bounded easterly on Gamaliel Waite, south on Widow 
Prudence Morse, whose husband, Christopher, had purchased the north- 
erly half of the Judkins lot. The Purton lot had passed to Robert 
Noone ; from him to Theodore Atkinson, 3 from Atkinson to Thomas 
Danforth, and from Danforth to Rawson. 4 

John Hull died, Oct. 1, 1683, leaving no will. Mrs. Hannah Sewall, 
being his only child, inherited the estate subject to the widow's dower ; 

1 Suffolk Probate Records, vol. i. pp. 502, 503. 

2 Suffolk Deeds, bk. x. p. 12. 3 Ibid., bk. i. p. 222. 
* Ibid., bk. xi. p. 304. 



and Sewall became tenant by the curtesy, during his life, of the real 
estate. Sewall and his wife and the Widow Hull agreed upon a division, 
which Avas approved by the Probate Court and recorded. The part 
material to this inquiry is: "Judith Hull shall have and enjoy the 
Mansion House of said Mr. Hull wherein he dyed with all the land 
thereunto adjoining and belonging and all tenements, shop, outhousing 
and buildings whatsoever on any part of said land standing with a 
small orchard or parcel of land thereto near adjacent late purchased 
of Mr. Edward Rawson." The words " Mansion House," "wherein he 
dyed," seem to leave no doubt that this was John Hull's home at his 
death, as it had become at his marriage. The proximity of the orchard 
purchased from Rawson fixes the locality definitely. The division 
further gives the reversion of Mrs. Hull's portion and the whole remain- 
der of the estate to Sewall and his wife, and the survivor of them for 
life, and the reversion to their heirs. This doubtless is the " entail " to 
which Sewall alluded when he refused to sell land at Cotton Hill for 
the King's Chapel. As a further identification of the location of the 
" Mansion House," the deed of division mentions " the dwelling house 
and land purchased of Robert Walker, on the other side of the street." 
This was conveyed to Hull, March, 1680, 1 "butted and bounded east 
with the Great street, south land late of Ralph Mason, west land of 
Hezekiah Usher, north land late of Peter Goose." This shows it to 
have been on the west side of Newbury Street, somewhat farther south 
than Hull's lot. It was the fifth original lot south from Winter Street, 
then called Blott's Lane. We have seen that Hull's was the third from 
Summer Street, then called Seven Star Lane, or the Mill Street. As 
these old deeds do not give any definite names to the streets, we have 
to follow the title down to more modern times to fix localities definitely. 
The title to this estate of Hull passed as follows: To Mr. and Mrs. 
Sewall. At Se wall's death, January, 1730, the whole estate was divided 
among his children and grandchildren by lot. The Mansion House 
and lot to Dr. Joseph Sewall ; but Samuel Sewall 2d exchanged 
with Joseph, who made a deed to him of the Mansion House and lot 
described as follows : " Situate lying and being in Newbury Street in 
Boston aforesaid fronting thereon westerly and there measuring fifty- 
five feet, southerly on land of Eneas Salter in three lines there measur- 
ing one hundred and twenty-six feet and six inches, easterly on land or 
orchard lately enjoyed by said Samuel Sewall Esq. in his life time and 
there measuring fifty -five feet, northerly on a way fourteen feet wide 
laid out for the use of the above said Mansion House, the house where 
Michael Hambleton lived and the orchard in the rear of said houses, 
there measuring in two lines one hundred and thirty-one feet." 2 The 

i Suffolk Deeds, bk. xii. p. 73. 2 Ibid., bk. xlv. pp. 117-137. 


remainder of the estate, viz. the Judkins house and lot, and the orchard 
behind both, extending back to the Gamaliel Waite estate, fell to the 
heirs of Mrs. Hirst (Betty Sewall), and was also conveyed by them to 
Samuel Sewall 2d ; thus establishing him in possession of the whole 

Samuel Sewall 2d dissipated the share of the estate of his grand- 
father which fell to him, and became a bankrupt within ten years of his 
father's death ; but before that happened he conveyed to his oldest son 
Henry the Mansion House, — " all that my brick Mansion House with the 
land thereto belonging." 1 The land is described in three parcels, as in 
the deeds to Samuel Sewall 2d, before mentioned. The rear boundary 
is upon land of Major Vassall, who had become owner of the Gamaliel 
Waite lot, on which he had erected the well-known house on Summer 
Street, so long the home of Samuel P. Gardner, which was removed 
within a few years to make room for the present granite block occupied 
by Hovey & Co., as before mentioned. Major Vassall built a house at 
Quincy almost exactly like it, which has been the home of the Adams 
family for a century or more. 

Samuel Sewall 2d died in 1751. His son Henry retained the home- 
stead, and at his death, in 1771, the estate passed by his will to his son 
Samuel, who was a loyalist and refugee. His tenant in the Judkins or 
Hambleton house, John McLane, was appointed agent by the Govern- 
ment. The estate was sold by Commissioners Samuel Henshaw and 
Samuel Barrett, in two portions, — the Mansion House and orchard to 
William and John Molineux, and the Judkins house and lot to its ten- 
ant, John McLane. 2 Thus, after one hundred and forty-six years' con- 
tinuous possession by six different generations, — Robert Hull, John 
Hull, Hannah Sewall, Samuel Sewall 2d, Henry Sewall, and Samuel 
Sewall 3d, — the original house-lot of Robert Hull passed out of the 
possession of his family. 

William and John Molineux sold to Jonathan Mason. 3 Jan. 20, 1803, 
Mason conveyed to Isaiah Thomas and Ebenezer T. Andrews, the well- 
known publishers (Thomas & Andrews), whose shop, No. 45 Newbury 
Street, at the sign of Fausfs statue, was directly opposite. 4 

Availing themselves of the fourteen-foot passage-way between the 
Mansion House and that on the Judkins lot, they laid out Central Court, 
and built five houses on the orchard. Subsequently Thomas sold his 
share to Andrews, who bought the Judkins house and lot, May 17, 1811, 
which had been sold by John McLane to Thomas Pons. 6 Thus the 
whole Hull-Sewall estate was again united in Eben T. Andrews, who 
retained it during his life. At the time of his death, in 1851, it passed 

1 Suffolk Deeds, bk. IxviiL p. 261 : March 14, 1739. 

2 Ibid., bk. cxxxix. p. 153 : 1781. 3 Ibid., bk. cxlvi. p. 153 : Dec. 21, 1784. 
4 Ibid., bk. ccvi. p. 13. 6 Ibid., bk. clxviii. p. 224. 


to his son, William T. Andrews, whose heirs still own it. I have thus, 
I think, fully identified the homestead of Robert Hull, and shown that 
John Hull lived and died there. 

The part of the Cotton Hill estate first owned by Hull was conveyed 
to him by Seaborn Cotton in 1664. 1 Hull had then been married and 
living in Newbury Street eighteen years. In 1666, by the death of his 
father, he came into full possession of the homestead. The Cotton 
House and larger part of the land he acquired in 1682, May 29, ouly 
sixteen months before his death. I think it is quite clear that he never 
removed from the Mansion House, where he was married, lived, and 

Where did Sewall live ? 

By the evidence frequently reiterated in the " Deeds " of division of 
his estate, he certainly " lived and died " in the Mansion House on 
Newbury Street. Did he ever live any part of his married life else- 
where ? On this question the Diary is almost our only guide. From 
that I gather: Fie was married in the "Old Hall" in Father Hull's 
house. He certainly lived with Father Hull till his first child was 
born. The account of the severe attack of dysentery from which both 
Mother Hull and Hannah Sewall suffered in October, 1676, shows 
plainly that they were living in the same house (vol. i. pp. 22-25). 
See also the account of the birth of the first child ; note that he and 
Father Hull were sitting in Hull's room when they heard the child's 
first cry (vol. i. p. 30) : "Our house, i. e. Father Hull's." April [1st], 
1677, he says, " John Sewall born at Father Hull's." 

If he had removed from Father Hull's, it would certainly have been 
mentioned in the Diary ; and if such removal ever took place, it must 
have been during the period covered by the lost volume of the Diary. 
It seems scarcely possible that any such move could have been made to 
Cotton Hill without some evidence of it in the remaining volumes. I 
have looked carefully through the three volumes without finding any 
evidence of it. In vol. i. p. 110, Dec. 9, 1685, two years after Hull's 
death, he mentions "Neighbor Gamaliel Waite;" (p. 183) July 16, 
1 687, was much disturbed in the night by a riot of men drinking and 
carousing at " Wheeler's Pond," only a few rods from the Hull Man- 
sion House; (p. 207) Shaller's distil-house in Newbury Street burned. 
Sewall considered his house in danger, at which the editors wonder, as 
they well might, if Sewall lived at Cotton Hill ; (p. 210) April 13, 1683, 
six months before Hull's death, "grafted a pear next J. Waite's;" J. 
Waite was a son of Gamaliel, and part of the estate had been conveyed 
to him before his father's death; (p. 331) Sept. 22, 1690, the account of 
Neighbor Hord's death-bed is striking: "about eleven o'clock I supposed 

i Suffolk Deeds, bk. vi. p. 227. 


to hear neighbor Mason at prayer with him- just as I and my wife were 
going to bed." Ilord's house was on the lot next south of Sewall's ; it 
was September, and with the windows open, the voice of " neighbor Ma- 
son " could easily have been heard. Ralph Mason lived on the west side 
of the street, next the corner of West Street. This John Hord, or Hurd, 
I presume is the same man whose excommunication for incorrigible 
drunkenness is recorded by Hull (p. 193 of his Diary). His death-bed 
behavior greatly shocked Sewall, who would not attend the funeral, 
which self-denial must have been a cross to him (p. 332). 

The catastrophe to the kitchen chimney, at winch Mother Hull was 
greatly alarmed, seems to have determined Sewall to begin his new 
house at once (p. 376). The old kitchen is first removed.; then the 
" Little Hall " is removed to Matthias Smith's : he seems to have been 
a neighbor in poor circumstances. 

The corner-stones of the new house were laid ; these give the editors 
much trouble, which disappears now we have the correct location of the 
house (p. 377). One corner was " towards Father Walker's." Robert 
Walker was one of the first settlers, and one of the four old men whose 
affidavits about the purchase from Blackstone are upon record. He was a 
wenver, and a very pious and worthy man, much esteemed by Sewall : 
witness his eulogy at the time of his death, May. 1689, four years before 
this time ; note the distinguished guests at the funeral, notwithstanding 
his humble position ; note that the guests assembled at Sewall's house, 
which shows its proximity. There seem to have been intimate relations 
between the families. Dame Walker was at this time keeping a dame 
school ; Sewall's children went to it (see vol. i. p. 164). Dame Walker 
sent home the children, too sick to teach them (see the account of her 
death, Dec. 21, 1695, vol. i. pp. 417, 418) ; Sewall's remarks to Sam., 
and Sam.'s great grief). Walker's lot was the third north of West 
Street. As I have before shown, Sewall owned the Walker estate, 
it having been purchased by Hull in 1680, thirteen years before. 
The next stone was at the southeast corner, toward " Wheeler's 
Pond." This noted watering-place was not more than eight or ten rods 
from Sewall's southerly line, being only separated by Hurd's. and part 
of Plantayne's, or Blanton's, lots. The next corner is " towards Fort 
Hill," — a considerable distance ; but as Summer Street was the road 
to Fort Hill, and was very near, it is natural enough. The last is the 
northwest corner, "towards Cotton Hill." This undoubtedly is only 
applicable on account of the large estate Sewall had there ; the indi- 
cations are obvious enough, and consistent with the Newbury Street 
location, while utterly inexplicable as applied to a house at Cotton 

Sewall had a fall in climbing about the new house, in one of the 
chambers "next Tilers" (vol. i. p. 388). In December, 1689, John 


Hurd, son of John Hurd, conveyed to John Tyler the north half of 
his father's house, twenty-two feet on the street, ninety-four feet long, 
bounded north by Captain Sewall's land. 1 It follows that the chamber 
" next Tilers " was on the south side. Sewall plants trees at Wheeler's 
Pond (vol. i. p. 401). 

June 6, 1713. There was a leak "next Salters" (vol. li. p. 388). 
Eneas Salter, who is frequently mentioned in the Diary, had become 
possessed of the Hurd lot. In the deeds of division of Sewall's estate, 
the Mansion House lot is bounded on the south by land of the late 
Eneas Salter ; the leak was therefore on the south side. 

He speaks of "neighbor Hamilton" (vol. iii. p. 14). From the di- 
vision deeds we learn that the Judkins house was occupied by Michael 

Funeral of Neighbor Isaac Odlin (p. 384). John Odlin, one of the 
old first settlers, and signer of the Blackstone affidavit, lived on New- 
bury Street, nearly opposite the Adams House ; this was doubtless his 
son. In short, every local allusion fits exactly with the Newbury Street 
residence. I cannot doubt that he spent the whole of his married life 
there, as it is certain that he died there. 

Sewall was, like Hull, captain of the South Company. He appears, 
by the Diary, to have kept "watch and ward" at night in his turn. 
His companion was usually Isaac Goose ; he was the son of Peter 
Goose, and lived nearly opposite Sewall, on Newbury Street. 

SewalVs Walk with the Governor. 

Many things that are troublesome to the editors in this walk become 
simple now that we know where Sewall's house was. First they start 
up " Hoar's Lane." As none of the streets had at this time definite 
names, such as local accident suggested seem to have been used. New- 
bury Street itself is called in the deeds the " Broad street," " Highway 
to Roxbury," " the street that leads from the Third meeting house 
to Roxbury." The side streets were still more indefinitely named. 
School Street is called, at as late a period as 1669, in a deed of 
Robert Right's, 1 " the street going up to Elder James Penn's " (Penn's 
lot was where the Albion now stands) ; yet the town school had been 
kept there since 1645. Winter Street was called " Blott's Lane," 
from Robert Blott who lived on the southerly corner. Summer Street 
was called " Seven Star Lane," " the Mill street," and " the road 
by Gridley's." West Street appears in this description as " Cowell's 

"Hoar's Lane," I cannot doubt, was "Rawson's," afterwards "Brom- 
field's" Lane. Rawson, Jan. 30, 1654, acquired the estate of the old 

i Suffolk Deeds, bk. xv. p. 80. 2 Ibid., bk. vi. p. 177. 


Notary Public and Clerk, William Aspinwall, who had fallen into dis- 
favor and returned to England. It consisted of about two and a half 
acres of land running from Washington to Tremont Street, on both sides 
of the lane now Bromfield Street. Here he built a house and lived. 
In 1669, March 17, having lived there fifteen years, he sold to William 
Hoar, a baker, a lot on Washington Street, bounded southerly on his 
neighbor Ephraim Pope, and northerly on « his lane." This was his 
first sale. In November, 1669, he sold to the Hon. John Pyncheon 
the opposite corner with his house, and in October of the next year the 
remainder of the land on the north side of his lane. The width of the 
lane is not defined, but all the deeds covenant for a free use of it. Sub- 
sequently he sold the remaining land on the south side to his son, 
William Rawson, Robert Noakes, J. Jepson, and the last lot near the 
middle, to John Pyncheon, so that in 1674 he had parted with the whole 
property. The lane, unlike the other cross-streets, was a purely private 
enterprise. Sewall's reason for calling it " Hoar's lane " was doubtless 
that William Hoar lived at the corner on the lot first sold by Rawson. 
Sewall had loaned Hoar some monev on a mortgage of it immediately 
after Hull's death. This mortgage is mentioned by the editors, but 
they erroneously suppose the land to have been on the corner of School 
Street. As Rawson's deed to Hoar bounds him in front on the highway 
leading from the Third Church to Roxbury, and School Street is north 
of that church, the land must have been south of the Old South Church. 
The streets were not yet named. An order was passed, May 3, 1708, 
fixing the names. " The way leading from Briscoe's corner in Marl- 
boro' street passing Justice Bromfield's into the Common, Rawson's 
Lane." Briscoe's corner is the corner where William Hoar lived, which 
he had mortgaged to Sewall in 1683, and subsequently released to him. 
Sewall, April 17, 1703, made a deed of gift of this property to his eld- 
est son, Samuel, and described it as then in the " tenure and occupation 
of Joseph Brisco, baker." 

The description of Newbury Street is as follows : " The street from 
the corner of the House in the tenure of Capt. Turphey nigh Deacon 
Elliot's corner leading into Town by the house of Samuel Sewall Esq. 
as far as Dr. Okes corner, Newbery street." This recognizes the resi- 
dence of Sewall as the most distinguished inhabitant. Dr. Thomas 
Oakes, brother of President Oakes, who was Sewall's family physi- 
cian (witness the Diary passim), bought the estate at the southwest 
corner of Summer and Newbury Streets, from William Rawson, 
son of Edward, whom I have previously shown to have been the 

In giving the boundaries of these streets, the initial and terminal 
points are almost uniformly fixed as in these cases. It seems apparent 
that the name of some prominent person on a corner was up to that 


time the only method of describing a street. In this neighborhood, for 
instance, in addition to the examples I have given, West Street starts 
from "Cowell's corner;" Winter Street, from " Ellises corner " (Edward 
Ellis, " Chirurgeon," married Robert Blott's daughter, and inherited his 
corner, and apparently the name was changed with it). School Street 
starts from Widow Haugh's corner. This estate had from the first been 
the homestead of Atherton Haugh, and, it seems, still remained in the 

After the passage of this order Sewall speaks of Rawson's Lane (vol. 
ii. p. 174). Coming through the lane, he saw Bastian, the negro, 
cutting an elm-tree near the Governor's coach-house. The editors sug- 
gest that this might have been at the corner of Tremont and Beacon 
Streets, where the Tremont House stands. It was really at the corner 
of Tremont and Bromfield Streets, where Horticultural Hall stands. It 
belonged to Sewall, who had acquired it through a mortgage from John 
Pynchon. The coach-house was leased to the Governor, being very 
conveniently situated to the rear of the Province House. It was so 
occupied at Se wall's death, and was sold by his heirs to Edward 
Bromfield, who had purchased all the land on the southerly side of 
the lane as far east as the Hoar lot, and built his house there, as 
the foregoing description of the lane in the order of the selectmen 

Assuming, then, that Hoar's Lane was Rawson's or Bromfield's Lane, 
let us continue our walk " past the Alms House," that is, up Park 
Street, thence down Beacon Street to the pasture afterwards bought by 
Sewall, and so often mentioned in the Diary as the Elm Pasture; thence 
by " Cowell's Lane," which doubtless was West Street, as this street in 
1708 ran from "Cowell's corner" to the Common. Sewall applies the 
name here, as he did Hoar's to Rawson's Lane. The editors here, being 
led away by the " new garden," take us through a very interesting 
digression to the foot of Beacon Street and Blackstone's garden ; but in 
fact the aged Governor and his young friend crossed the Common from 
Joy Street to West Street, and there, as they came out of the lane to 
the main street, they met little Sam Sewall, then about seven years old, 
who ran to them, telling of the death, by the hands of the butcher, of 
the old cow ; upon which Sewall gives, as usual, an obituary notice, 
saying, " she has served this family ten years, nine since I came into 
it ; " thus adding another proof that the Sewall and Hull families were 
one. " Then to the new Garden." This is conjectured by the editors to 
be at the foot of the Common. It seems to me it must have been the 
orchard or garden bought by Hull two years before from Edward Raw- 
son on Summer Street next Gamaliel Waite's. It was the 10th of 
May, the spring work was going on, and Sewall doubtless wished to 
show the Governor how he was adorning it. It was to Sewall the "New 


Garden" and therefore specially interesting. "Thence to the House, 
and then a little farther to the pasture by Engs." Madett Engs, as he 
signs his name to his will, had a lot and house where he lived, on the 
north side of Summer Street, about opposite Church Green. Sewall 
had a lot next east of him, and this doubtless was the place visited. 
The peculiar name of Engs was a grievous stumbling-block to the 
clerks of his time. I find Eings, Engles, English, Ingles, Inge, Inglys, 
but never Engs ; Madid, Mawditt, Maudit, but never Madett. Engs 
left a son and three grandsons. The real estate passed out of the 
family in the third generation. The name is still found in the Bos- 
ton and New York Directories* Had Sewall's house been at Cotton 
Hill, it would have been more than " a little farther." 

Thence to the governor's home. As the editors say, Governor Brad- 
street's residence at that time is unknown. It was probably in a hired 
house, as no real estate suitable seems to have belonged to him there. 
He provides in his will for the payment of a quarter's rent for his widow 
after his death. Lie was taxed in 1G88 in the Seventh Division or Com- 
pany, with John Pynchon, W illiam Hoar, and Peter Sargeant, who 
all lived on the westerly side of Marlboro' Street. Captain Sewall is 
always mentioned in the Eighth Company, in the assessors' lists, also 
in the enumeration or list of inhabitants in 1695. 

In the Diary I find two passages that might be construed to indicate 
that Sewall lived at Cotton Hill. The first is in vol. i. p. 59 : Sewall's 
petition for leave to build a il fore door " for " my house on Cotton 
Hill." This was of course to project into the street, as no permission 
would otherwise be needed. This is one year after Hull's death, Oct. 15, 
1684. Winter was coming on ; and no doubt the tenant, whoever he was, 
demanded the relief. Sewall had been married more than eight years, 
and would not have waited so long for such a necessary addition to the 
comfort of his house. There is nothing to show that Sewall occupied 
the house he owned. Again, in 1699, when the school-house was built 
in Scollay Square, he made vigorous protest. The town promised not 
to build any more buildings there, and Sewall had the measurements 
from the school-house put upon record. These all relate to his gate- 
posts as far as his estate is concerned, not to any house, and obviously 
have no bearing upon the place of his residence. The history of the 
school-house is curious. In 1693 it was sold to William Scollay for 
£500 ($1,666.67). In 1872 the city paid $185,595 for the same prop- 
erty. It is true Scollay had added, by purchase from Jeffrey, thirty 
feet in length on the north ; but the town had previously cut off more 
than that on the southerly end of the lot. 

I think the evidence I have adduced is incontrovertible. I have 
searched carefully for it, and am sure that the editors of the Diary will 
be glad to have the facts pointed out 



Cotton Hill. 

The Cotton Hill estate does not lose its interest because neither Hull 
nor Sewall lived there. It is certain that John Cotton built his house 
there, and that Sir Henry Vane built such an addition to it as to be 
spoken of as part of Cotton's house ; that when Vane returned to 
England he gave his house to Seaborn Cotton, the oldest sou ; that 
Cotton provided in his will for carrying out this bequest or gift. 

Cotton's other heirs, in 1664, 1 released this house and land to Sea- 
born. It was the southerly part of the land, and its relations to the other 
part of the house may be gathered fnfm this addendum to the deed of 
release, which is executed by Sarah, Increase, and Maria Mather, and 
John Cotton : — 

" Whereas in the within written deed the bounds eastly is mentioned 
to be from the north side of the house east, It is agreed upon mutu- 
ally by the persons interested therein that sayd bounds is only from the 
south side of the present standing gate upon a straight line to the north 
side of said house ; and further it is agreed that from the north side of 
said house there be a straight line run down to the Front or Town 
street sixteen foot northward of the south side of said gate, which said 
strip of land is and shall be by agreement of all parties in perpetual 
common for the use of both parties." 

This is not very clear, but it shows that Vane's house stood back 
from the street, and that there was room for a sixteen-foot passage-way 
between it and Cotton's house, although it is called part of Cotton's 
house. No further aid from the " Records " can be obtained until the 
division of the estate among the heirs of Judith Cooper in 1758, ninety- 
four years afterwards. Then there were three houses upon the estate. 
First, the Cotton house on the north lot, which had a front on the street 
of seventy feet ; then a passage-way of twenty feet, probably the six- 
teen-foot way made four feet wider. Back of this, one hundred and 
seventy feet up the hill, another house, by whom built is uncertain, but 
most likely while Judith Cooper was in possession, as there is no men- 
tion of it in the deed of division of Sewall's estate. Then upon the 
southerly lot in front, which was seventy-three feet wide, was still 
another house, which by the partition was divided by a line passing 
through the middle of it, making two lots, the southern thirty-three feet 
in front, and the northern — bounded on the passage-way — forty feet. 
This house was then in possession of William Vassall, to whom the 
whole estate was conveyed by Judith Cooper's heirs. 

Was this the house built by Sir Harry Vane ? If so, it had been 
moved southerly. When Hull bought it, ninety-four years before, the 

i Suffolk Deeds, bk. vi. p. 233. 


passage-way was laid out along the northerly side of the house ; now this 
passage-way was forty feet from the centre line of the house, and the 
Cotton house was still more remote. Of course it may have been 

Of the use of the estate while in Sewall's possession, something may 
be learned from the Diary. The first mention of it is Aug. 31, 1G86 : 
"Mr. Lee views the house at Cotton Hill in order to taking it" (vol. i. 
p. 15^1). We are not informed whether he did. March 27, 1699, 
4> Captain Tuthill desires to take the Cotton House" (vol. i. p. 404). 
It appears that he did so. July 25, 1699, " Between six and seven (just 
at sunset) I have my lady (Bellomont) up upon Cotton Hill and show 
her the town " (vol. i. p. 500). "Mrs. Tuthill's daughters invited my 
lady as came down and gave good glass of wine." So Tuthill had 
moved into the house. Of course, if Sewall had lived anywhere in the 
neighborhood, his house would have been the scene of the entertain- 

Sept. 4, 1700, " Capt. Byfield and Peter Weare accompany Sewall 
as witnesses to warn Mr. Googe out of the house on Cotton Hill " 
(vol. ii. p. 22). I take this to be Captain Edward Gouge, of whom 
Dunton says : " He is an ingenuous and witty person. He is an old 
bachelor and yet as I am told a secret friend of the fair sex." This 
was in 1686. He was married before May, 1693, when his wife, 
Frances, relinquished dower in an estate he mortgaged to Elizur 
Holyoke, and subsequently surrendered. His widow had administra- 
tion on his estate March 6, 1705. His estate was insolvent. The 
town records charge him, April 25, 1689, with a son by Martha Staples. 
Sewall mentions his death in the Diary, Jan. 26, 1705 : " The poor 
man lived undesired and died unlamented." Gouge promised to leave 
in November, and probably did so. 

Oct. 17, 1700. Grove Hirst and Elizabeth Sewall were married and 
probably went to housekeeping in the house vacated by Gouge. At 
any rate, after Mrs. Hirst's death, which took place July, 1716, the 
Diary says, Dec. 24, 1717 : "Agreed with Obadiah Gore carpenter to 
let him the house at Cotton Hill in which Mr. Hirst lately dwelt for 
four and twenty pounds a year to pay quarterly. Term ten years 
beginning the last day of this December." This term extends to within 
two years of Sewall's death. But Gore died before the end of the lease, 
and in 1724 the widow settled the estate, and paid Sewall £15, as 
charged in her account, probably for rent. At the time of Sewall's 
death, his soES-in-law, Cooper and Gerrish, occupied the houses. 

It seems to be thought that the Gardiner Greene house may have 
been identical with the Vane house, but it seems impossible that any 
one who ever saw it could credit such an idea. The house built by 
William Vassall, after he acquired the estate from the Cooper heirs, 


was placed far back from the street, approached by a series of steps, 
the grounds graded into terraced gardens, and the house itself so large, 
roomy, and elegant, that Mr. Greene never thought any material change 
in it desirable, as his descendants inform us. Certainly the structure 
which Sir Harry built, as an addition to John Cotton's house in 163G, 
was not moved up the hill, one hundred and twenty-two years after- 
wards, after having been rented to numerous tenants, to be the mansion- 
house of a rich man of fashion like William Vassall. We know from 
contemporary history that this was always considered one of the finest 
estates in town. When William Vassall, like most of his race, became 
a refugee, the house and furniture were put in charge of Judge Oliver 
Wendell by the authorities. The house was rented at auction from 
year to year. The account rendered shows from year to year the 
depreciation of the Continental currency. In 1780 the rent was £2,600, 
which was reduced to specie £65, or forty for one. A subsequent 
account is at seventy for one. The furniture was removed to fit up a 
house for the French Ambassador, and after the end of the war was 
sold at auction for £980, lawful money, which, considering the prevail- 
ing poverty and that the furniture had been used as it was, shows that 
it must originally have been very rich and handsome. The estate, for 
some reason which does not appear, escaped the confiscation that befell 
so many others. It passed to Patrick Jeffrey ; he sold the part west of 
Somerset Street to Asa Hammond, and the rest to Jonathan Mason, 
who almost at once sold to Gardiner Greene, who thus became possessed 
of the whole front originally granted to Cotton, and continued to hold 
ir, the remainder of his days. 

What became of Sir Harry Vane's house? and John Cotton's? It 
seems to me clear that when Vassall acquired the property and built 
his fine house on it, the three old houses that encumbered its front, in- 
tercepting his prospect, were removed. Whether torn down or removed 
whole, they disappeared from view and from any further connection 
with history. 

The various conveyances show that when Hull bought of Seaborn 
Cotton he bought one house. When the John Cotton lot was conveyed 
by his heirs to Nicholas Paige, it is described as " the dwelling house 
and ground under the same, formerly the mansion house of their late 
father Rev. Mr. John Cotton." Paige conveys to Hull the land, " to- 
gether with all houses, tenements, new and old stables, out houses, edi- 
fices, buildings, fences &c." The next description is forty-eight years 
after, in the partition of Sewall's estate in 1730. Then the description 
is " the land at Cotton Hill with the buildings and appurtenances in 
tenure of William Cooper and Samuel Gerrish.'* 

As I have said, the third house in rear of the Cotton mansion is 
never mentioned until the estate was divided between Judith Cooper's 


heirs, and it was then immediately sold to Vassall. When Vassal] sold 
to Jeffrey he describes the land, and adds with the " Mansion house, 
out houses and appurtenances." No other houses are mentioned. Jef- 
frey conveys to Mason, and he to Greene, land " with a dwelling house 
and brick stable." There is certainly, from the time that Vassall bought 
in 1758, no mention upon the record of either of the old houses. 

Bowditch, as quoted in the Diary, points out an error into which 
Drake fell about an old house supposed by Drake to be Sir Harry 
Vane's, and shows that Drake was " within one" of it. The house in 
question stood almost exactly where Rogers's shoe-store has been now 
for almost half a century. It was a brick house, and in the last years 
of its existence was used for offices. The late Dr. A, A. Gould, Presi- 
dent of the Massachusetts Medical Society, had an office there in 1833 
and 1834; it then belonged to Gardiner Greene, who acquired it in 
1824. It was conveyed to him 1 by the Hon Thomas L. Winthrop, 
trustee under the will of Sarah Waldo. It was conveyed to her in 1791 2 
by the Hon. James Bowdoin, Governor, as executor and trustee under 
the will of his father-in-law, the Hon. John Erving, and is there de- 
scribed as a " Messuage, land and tenement at the head of Court street, 
consisting of a large brick house, a barn and sundry out houses, being 
the Mansion house of Hon. John Erving" 

The lot in the " Book of Possessions " is assigned to the Rev. Daniel 
Maude, who shares with Philemon Pormont the honor of being the 
earliest school-teacher. As he removed to Dover after a few years, the 
property passed to Robert Howard, Notary Public, who lived there when 
Hull acquired the Seaborn Cotton estate. At his death and that of his 
wife in 1683, the property passed by will to his son Jonathan, who died, 
unmarried and intestate, in 1690. His brothers and sisters, of whom 
there were six, shared the estate ; and James Leblond became the 

As shown above, it passed from his heirs to the Hon. John Erving. 
The brick house was probably built by Leblond. In his inventory the 
real estate is, "Brick House and wooden and land, 1713." The convey- 
ance by his heirs to Erving, April 12, 1736, "Land at upper part of 
Queen street, whereon stand two Dwelling houses one of Brick the other 
of timber." From the appearance of age about the structure it seems 
probable that the brick house became the mansion-house of the Hon. 
John Erving, and remained without material change until its final de- 
struction in 1835, when Cotton Hill was reduced to its present level. 

It is difficult now to realize that Cotton Hill before its demolition was 
seventy feet at its apex above the present grade of Pemberton Square, 
as Bowditch tells us it was. It was so steep originally on the northerly 

1 Suffolk Deeds, bk. ccxciii. p. 196. 2 Ibid., bk. clxxxii. p. 161. 


face, that Captain Cyprian Southack (who laid out Howard Street, then 
called Southack's Court), was ordered by the selectmen, Oct. 19, 1732, 
" to secure his hill near the Valley acre by rails or otherwise that people 
may not be in danger." The Valley acre so frequently spoken of in 
the deeds perhaps received its designation from the valley between 
Beacon Hill and Cotton Hill, now occupied by Somerset Street; though 
now that the eastern hill has been laid low, and the western one much 
reduced in height, it does not seem appropriate to associate the word 
" valley " with it. Whether this hill had any springs does not appear, 
but in the town records on the 20th day of the fifth mouth, 1657, the 
selectmen appointed <k Deacon Marshall and Ensign Hull a committee 
to gaine liberty from Mr. Seaborn Cotton and his Mother to bring water 
down from their hill to the Conduit to be erected." 2 The sources of 
supply to that first attempt at water-supply for Boston have always 
been in doubt ; whether any was ever obtained from this source does 
not appear. 

With this I conclude what I have to say of this truly historic ground. 

Estes Howe. 

Mr. C. C. Smith announced a Memoir of the late Mr. George 

1 Report of Record Committee, vol. ii. p. 138. 

T&rrpc /9dc/c/?~ 

^k.\.\w,^\. ?^\wa\wCi t^., %»saow 





George Dexter was a member of the Historical Society for 
six years, and during this period he was absent from home, 
on account of ill health, for about a quarter of the time. But 
his membership was long enough to secure for him the warmest 
personal regard of his associates, and to enrich our Proceedings 
with numerous contributions marked by abundant evidence of 
ripe scholarship and patient industry. He had in this compar- 
atively short time rendered important service to the Society as 
its Recording Secretary ; and still more important and varied 
service in later years might have been justly anticipated from 
him. He was born in Ohio, in the village of Fulton, now a 
part of the city of Cincinnati, on the 18th of July, 1838, and 
was the fourth child of Edmund and Mary Ann [Dellinger] 
Dexter. Through his father, who was a native of Leicester- 
shire, he was of English descent ; and on his mother's side 
he traced his ancestry back to Germany, where his maternal 
grandfather was of high social rank. His school days were 
passed wholly in his native city ; his first teacher being Miss 
Mary Ann Davis, of whom he cherished through life the pleas- 
antest recollections. After leaving her school he spent a little 
less than a year in the academy of Mr. Joseph Herron, at 
that time connected with the Cincinnati College, from which 
he passed to the classical school under the charge of Mr. Eben 
S. Brooks, where he completed his preparation for college. 
" To Mr. Brooks and his able assistant, Dr. N. E. Soule, both 
graduates of Harvard," he wrote in his College Class Book, 
" I owe much of the fondness for classical studies which has 


been the sole distinguishing mark of my college course." He 
entered Harvard College, without conditions, in 1854, and 
was graduated, with good but not high rank, in 1858. His 
part at Commencement was an essay on Aaron Burr. During 
the whole of his course he resided outside of the college yard, 
so that he lost some of the more intimate associations of an 
undergraduate's life ; but he impressed all his classmates by 
the purity and refinement which characterized him in later 
years. They were " as marked in the college boy," says one 
of his friends- in the College and in this Society, " as they 
have been in the Christian gentleman whom we all have held 
in special regard, whom they who knew him best have es- 
teemed most deeply." 1 

A month after leaving college he sailed for Europe, with 
the intention of spending the next winter in Berlin, after 
which he hoped to pass "some years in stud) 7 at the various 
German universities and in travelling." But the attractions 
of home were too strong for one who was always held to 
family. and friends by the strongest ties, and he soon changed 
his plans. He spent a few months in travel in Germany and 
Italy, and returned home in December; and in the following 
March he entered the Harvard Law School. He remained in 
the Law School until July, 1860, when he received the degree 
of LL.B. After graduating from the Law School he con- 
tinued to live in Cambridge, as a resident graduate, until the 
summer of 1861, when he went to Europe with his parents, 
both of whom were in failing health. Not lonsr after land- 
ing in Europe his father became so seriously ill as to require 
from him constant care dnring the remainder of their absence 
abroad. They all returned in July, 1862, and a week after 
their arrival in New York the father died. In the following 
September Mr. Dexter again became a resident graduate in 

In May, 1864, in the darkest days of the civil war, in 
response to a call for volunteers to serve for ninety days, he 
enlisted as a private in the twelfth unattached company of 
Massachusetts Volunteer Militia, which was composed almost 
wholly of residents of Cambridge. The company was sent to 
garrison the fort at Provincetown. While in this service Mr. 

1 See the remarks by the Rev. Henry W. Foote, ante, p. 9. 


Dexter acted as commissary and quartermaster-sergeant. Dur- 
ing bis absence be was elected secretary of bis college class, 
and received the degree of A.M. In September, 1865, be sailed 
again for Europe. Tbe winter was spent in Paris, after which 
be travelled in England, and returned to this country in 
June, I860. On tbe 17th of September, 1868, he was married 
to Lucy Waters ton, daughter of Mr. Charles Deane, and im- 
mediately afterward sailed for Europe with his wife. They 
returned after an absence of three months, and took up their 
residence in Cambridge, which had always possessed peculiar 
attractions for him. In September, 1869, he was appointed 
Tutor of Modern Languages in Harvard College, which place 
he resigned, in October, 1870, to become Steward. Tbe duties 
of his new office did not prove altogether congenial, and he re- 
signed it in December, 1871. He had inherited ample means, 
and he did not afterward engage in any remunerative em- 
ployment ; but he was never idle, and freely gave his ser- 
vices for the promotion of objects in which he took a warm 
personal interest. 

Mr. Dexter was elected a member of the American Antiqua- 
rian Society at tbe April meeting in 1876. In the work of 
that Society he was much interested, though absence from home 
and ill-health made his attendance at its semi-annual meetings 
somewhat irregular. To its printed Proceedings for October, 
1881, he contributed a short and carefully prepared paper on 
"The Testimony of Fabyan's Chronicle to Hakluyt's Account 
of the Cabots." In November, 1877, he was unanimously 
elected a member of the Historical Society. This election 
opened to Mr. Dexter the opportunity for the best work of his 
life, and gave to us, in the apt phrase of Mr. Winthrop, " a 
model Secretary for all who may follow him." When Mr. 
Deane, who had filled the office of Recording Secretary with 
signal ability for thirteen years, was transferred, in 1877, to 
tbe Corresponding Secretaryship, the Nominating Committee 
found great difficult}' in selecting a successor. Tbe office was 
tendered to several gentlemen, who declined to undertake its 
duties from a feeling that more time would be required for 
the discharge of those duties as they had been performed by 
Mr. Deane, than could be given by any one actively engaged 
in other pursuits. It was well known to two of the members 
of the Committee, — the late William G. Brooks and the late 



Delano A. Goddard, — and to other members of the Society 
with whom they consulted, that Mr. Dexter had often ren- 
dered valuable service to the Committee for publishing the 
Proceedings ; and their thoughts naturally turned toward 
him as possessing all the needful qualifications. But he was 
not a member of the Society. In this emergency our brilliant 
and accomplished associate, the late Edmund Quincy, con- 
sented to take the office, only on condition, however, that 
lie should not be asked to serve for a longer period than one 
year. He was accordingly elected, and entered on his duties 
with a zeal and energy which justified the highest expecta- 
tions as to his service. But these expectations were speedily 
and sadly disappointed. Mr. Quincy died in a little more 
than a month after his election ; and at the same meeting at 
which his death was announced, the death of another distin- 
guished member, Mr. J. Lothrop Motley, was also announced. 
As soon as the rules and custom of the Society would allow, 
Mr. Dexter was elected to fill one of the two vacancies thus 
created ; and at the Annual Meeting in the following April, 
he was elected Recording Secretary, which office he filled for 
a little more than five years. 

Mr. Dexter did not limit himself to a prompt and in every 
way satisfactory performance of his duties as Secretary, and 
as Chairman of the Committee for publishing the Proceedings; 
he began at once to enrich our volumes with numerous and 
important communications of his own. At the meeting in 
February, 1878, he communicated from the original manu- 
script Tutor Sever's argument before the Massachusetts Coun- 
cil, in 1732, advocating the right of the instructors in Harvard 
College to a place in the Corporation, prefacing it by a short 
and lucid statement of the questions at issue, and of the 
action on them. 1 In May following, he communicated an un- 
published letter of Governor Pownall to the Rev. Dr. Cooper 
after the recognition of American independence, with explan- 
atory remarks. In September of the same year he presented 
copies of a considerable number of letters of the Rev. Dr. 
Andrew Eliot, written during the Revolution, accompanied 
by a short account of the writer, and by the necessary eluci- 

1 This communication was reprinted in a separate pamphlet for private distri- 
bution, as were several of Mr. Dcxter's later communications. Nine of these 
reprints are in the Society's archives. 


dations; and these were followed, in October, by remarks on 
some newly discovered letters of Columbus and Vespucius, 
with translations of the letters themselves. 

In September, 1879, he gave an interesting account of M. 
Moerenhout, whose name had been on the Corresponding Rull 
of the Society for more than forty years, and who had recently 
died at Los Angeles, in California, where he was at that time 
French Consul. At the same meeting Mr. Dexter also pre- 
sented a report in detail on the Holmes Papers, a collection of 
miscellaneous papers formerly in the possession of the Rev. 
Abiel Holmes, D.D., an officer of the Society for twenty years, 
and author of the "Annals of America." 

In October he made a still more interesting communication, 
in submitting for publication the manuscript journals kept by 
Thomas Wallcut, at Marietta, in Ohio, in 1790, and by Charles 
Turner, Jr., in New Brunswick and Maine in 1802, with full 
editorial notes. His next important contribution was at the 
April meeting in 1880, when he offered some remarks on the 
alleged visits of the Northmen to the American continent, 
and presented an unpublished letter on this subject from Pro- 
fessor Erasmus Rask to Henry Wheaton, written just after the 
publication of Mr. Wheaton 's '.' History of the Northmen." 

About the time that this communication was made, Mr. Dex- 
ter wrote for the first volume of the " Memorial History of 
Boston " a short but admirably clear and well-considered chap- 
ter on " The Early European Voyagers in Massachusetts Bay." 
While thus actively engaged in the work for which this Soci- 
ety was founded, his health suddenly gave way; and on the 
1st of October he tendered his resignation of the office of 
Recording Secretary, the duties of which he had discharged 
to the "great satisfaction" of the Society. "My health," he 
wrote, "has become uncertain, and my physician 'tells me that 
I cannot expect to go to Boston, or to attend to business of 
any kind for some months to come. As I cannot perform the 
duties of the office, I must necessarily resign it. I do so with 
regret ; for I have appreciated the honor of the position, and 
enjoyed the pleasant duties of the office." In spite of the 
doubtful aspect for the future, and the uncertainty as to 
when, if ever, he would be able to take up his work again, 
the Society voted unanimously not to accept his resignation. 
A few weeks later he went abroad with his wife and one of 


his children. The winter was spent in the south of France 
and in Italy. To the depression which naturally attaches to 
invalidism in a foreign land was now added the poignant grief 
of losing his youngest daughter, a fascinating child in her 
sixth year, who had been left at Cambridge with her maternal 
grandparents, and who died in January. He returned, how- 
ever, in June, 1881, apparently much benefited by the change 
of climate. 

At the close of the summer vacation he resumed his work 
in the Society with fresh zeal ; and at the October meeting he 
submitted some very carefully prepared remarks on the first 
voyage under Sir Humphrey Gilbert's patent of 1578. Two 
months later he communicated copies of several letters of 
Governor Hutchinson in the Public Record Office in London, 
to which the attention of the Society had been called a short 
time before ; and he also communicated for publication a 
manuscript record book of the Suffolk Bar, covering the 
period between 1770 and 1805, which he illustrated by an 
historical introduction and numerous notes. It was his hope 
that the task of editing this interesting volume would be un- 
dertaken by one of the legal members of the Society ; but the 
gentleman to whom he looked for this service was then busy 
with other literary and professional work, and he accordingly 
assumed the labor himself, and performed it in a manner which 
left nothing to be regretted. In January, 1882, he presented 
a short and excellent memoir of the late Dr. Joseph Palmer. 
It had now become apparent, however, that he could not re- 
main at home during the winter and spring; and a few weeks 
later, by the advice of his physician, he went to Aiken, S. C, 
where he remained until the early summer. This new exile 
from home and friends was no small trial to him, though he 
wrote to a friend, " I am well established here, and enjoying 
good weather and excellent health." 

On his return he again resumed his seat at the Council 
table ; and at the first meeting of the Society in the autumn 
lie presented a number of letters written by Henry Wheaton 
during his first visit to Europe in 1805 and 1806. Among 
the plans which Mr. Dexter did not live to execute was the 
preparation of a memoir of Mr. Wheaton and a selection from 
his correspondence. At the same meeting at which this com- 
munication was made, he gave some extracts from a diary 


kept in the spring and summer of 1775 by the Rev. Paul 
Litchfield, with introductory and explanatory remarks. In 
October lie communicated the journal kept by the Rev. Dr. 
Belknap during a visit to the Oneida Indians in 179G, which 
lie accompanied by an interesting introduction and valuable 
notes. This was his last contribution to our Proceedings, and 
nearly his last work for us. In December he was again oblige d 
to leave home for his health, and went to Santa Barbara in 
California. " California agrees with me quite well," lie wrote 
to a friend, in February ; "and although Santa Barbara is not 
exactly the paradise pictured in the travellers' books and 
stories, it offers many attractions to a quiet man." While 
here he wrote to the Nominating Committee declining a re- 
election as Secretary; and at the Annual Meeting in 1883 his 
resignation was reluctantly accepted. 

In the summer he came north, with the purpose of remov- 
ing his family to Santa Barbara, and of making that place his 
home for several years, with the vain hope of restoration to 
health. On the last day before leaving Cambridge he came 
into Boston to the Dowse Library to bid good-by to the friends 
whom he was accustomed to meet there. His tone was cheer- 
ful and hopeful ; but the overland journey to California and 
the voyage from San Francisco proved harder and more ex- 
hausting than he or any one had anticipated. He reached 
Santa Barbara greatly reduced in strength ; and from that 
time he slowly and steadily declined. He breathed his last 
on the 18th of December, 1888. As was natural and fit, his 
mortal remains were brought back to the Cambridge which he 
loved well, and laid for their final rest at Mount Auburn. 

The last literary work in which Mr. Dexter was engaged 
was a chapter on " Cortereal, Verrazano, Gomez, Thevet," for 
the forthcoming "Narrative and Critical History of America." 
The subject was a difficult one; and more than once he ex- 
pressed to a friend his weariness of it, and his regret at having 
undertaken to deal with the perplexing questions involved in 
it. But there are no signs of this in his treatment of his sub- 
ject. The narrative is clear and strong; and the critical part 
firm and well considered. He had studied his subject thor- 
oughly ; and he dealt with it in a calm and judicial manner. 
The work was so well and so thoroughly done that it scarcely 
needed the revision in the proofs which he did not live to give 


it. In addition to the writings already enumerated, Mr. Dex- 
ter contributed short and excellent memoirs of Isaiah Thomas 
and of Simon Greenleaf to the Early Proceedings of the Soci- 
ety ; and he rendered great service in the preparation of the 
Indexes to those volumes, — the copious Index to the first 
volume having been prepared wholly by him. He also pre- 
pared, as a labor of love, the Index to the second volume 
of the " Documentary History of Maine," which Mr. Deane 
edited for the Maine Historical Society in 1877. 

Mr. Dexter had great natural refinement, courteous manners, 
and a rare sweetness of temper ; and in all his personal and 
official relations he was one of the most agreeable of men. 
The friends whom he once made were his friends alwa} 7 s. No 
man was ever less moved by selfish motives. His opinions 
were never extreme, and were always expressed with candor 
and with perfect fairness toward those who differed with him. 
To the religious denomination in which he was brought up he 
was warmly attached, serving for some years as a vestryman 
and afterward as a warden of Christ Church, Cambridge, and 
as secretary and afterward as treasurer of the Episcopal Church 
Association in Boston and its neighborhood ; but he was free 
from every form of narrowness and exclusiveness. He had 
the tastes of a scholar, which his ample means enabled him to 
cultivate freely ; and his frequent visits to Europe made him 
familiar with several of the modern languages, and stored his 
mind with the best fruits of foreign travel. His habits were 
exact and methodical ; and in pursuing his historical investiga- 
tions his industry was untiring. As Chairman of the Commit- 
tee for publishing the Proceedings of this Society, he went far 
beyond the requirements of his office, even verifying every im- 
portant statement and every reference to printed authorities 
in the communications of other members. He was a polished 
writer and a judicious critic. In the work of the Historical 
Society he took especial pleasure ; and it is not the exagger- 
ated estimate of personal friendship, but a cool and balanced 
judgment which all his fellow- workers will confirm, when it is 
said, as it has been said often, that the Society has experienced 
no heavier loss in recent years than by the early death of the 
subject of this Memoir. 

1884.] "INSTRUCTIONS" OF MALDEN, 1770. 335 


The monthly meeting was held on Thursday, the 11th 
instant. The President being absent, Dr. Ellis took his place, 
and gave expression to the regret which was felt by all that 
Mr. Winthrop was detained at home by illness. 

The Secretary read his notes of the previous meeting. 

The Librarian mentioned the books which had been given 
to the Library. 

The Corresponding Secretary announced that Messrs. Wil- 
liam G. Russell and Edward J. Lowell had signified their 
acceptance of Resident Membership. 

The Hon. Geokge S. Hale then offered the following 
remarks : — 

I ask leave to present to the Society, in behalf of Mrs. Mary 
Pratt Cooke Nash, the daughter of the late Josiah Parsons 
Cooke, long an honored and leading member of the Suffolk 
Bar, this "Lithographic Print " of the Instructions of the Town 
of Maiden to their Representative in the General Court of 
Massachusetts in 1776, giving their assurance to that body 
that, if America should be declared " a Free and Independent 
Republic," they would " support and defend the measure to 
the last drop of their blood and the last farthing of their 

Chief Justice Marshall deemed this spirited paper of so 
much interest and importance, that he quotes it, in describ- 
ing the advance of the desire and purpose of the colonies to 
separate from the mother country, in the first edition, pub- 
lished in 1804, 1 of his " Life of George Washington," in con- 
nection with like declarations by the city of Boston. 

They deserve a prominent place as an early expression of 
these sentiments, although the controversy as to the exact 
order of the appearance of such declarations from different 
parts of the country does not seem to me of very great 

i Vol. ii. p. 407. 


In the Massachusetts House of Representatives, on the 10th 
of May, 1776, it was "Refolved, as the Opinion of this Houfe 
that the Inhabitants of each Town in this Colony, ought in full 
meeting warned for that Purpofe, to advife the Perfon or 
Perfons who fhall be chofen to Reprefent them in the next 
General Court, whether if the honorable Congrefs mould, 
for the Safety of the faid Colonies, declare them Independent 
of the Kingdom of Great-Britain, they the faid Inhabitants will 
folemnly engage with their Lives and Fortunes to Support 
the Congrefs in the Meafure." 

These Instructions were adopted by the town of Maiden 
on the 27th of May, 1776, and are quoted by Marshall from the 
" Gazette." Mr. Frothingham, in " The Rise of the Republic 
of the United States " (page 507), refers to these meetings, and 
says : " The instructions of Maiden and Boston were the earliest 
I have found in the newspapers." The former, I may add, were 
adopted on the 27th, the latter on the 23d, of May, 1776. By 
whom they were prepared does not appear of record ; but the 
following letter from D. P. Corey, Esq., who is now engaged in 
the preparation of a history of the town, gives some additional 
particulars in regard to them, and his sketch of the town of 
Maiden, in Drake's "History of Middlesex" (page 127), 
attributes the authorship to Peter Thacher. 

Malden, Oct. 21, 1884. 
Hon. Geo. S. Hale, Boston. 

Dear Sir, — I have your note of Friday. I understand that the 
lithograph of the "Instructions" was the result of a subscription ob- 
tained by the efforts of the late Rev. Sylvanus Cobb. Copies may 
now and then be found in the possession of old Maiden families, al- 
though they are getting to be quite rare. One was recently presented 
to the Maiden Public Library, and very appropriately hangs in its 
reading-room. The following extracts will give you some information : 

In a warrant for a town-meeting, May 27, 1776, Art. 1, — 

"To see if the Town will Choos a Committee to Advise the Person 
Chosen to Represent them in the next General Court whether that if 
the Honorable Congress Should for the Safety of the Coloneys Declare 
them Independent of the Kingdom of Great Britain they the Said In- 
habitants will Solemnly Engage with their lives and fortains to Support 
them in the measure." 

At the meeting : — 

"The Town Resolved themselves into a Committee the Rev"?. Mr 

1881.] THE REV. PETER THACHER, D.D. 337 

Willis was Choosen Chairman the Committee Proceeded to Consider 
the matter and Prepared the following Instructions." 

Ezra Sargeant was the representative to the General Court that 
year. You will notice that the town resolved itself into a Committee. 
Considering this, I suspect that the Instructions were already prepared, 
and only awaited presentation and acceptance by the town. Mr. Willis, 
the chairman, was the pastor of the South Church. I have no evidence 
that he was possessed of the proper spirit or the ability required to pro- 
duce the ringing sentences of the paper. There was only one other in 
Maiden who could have written them, and he had both the ability and 
the will. He had already done good work in the cause of freedom, 
and his name stands high among the ablest ministers of the Revolution. 
I think Peter Thacher, then pastor of the North Parish, and afterwards 
of the Brattle Street Church, Boston, must have been the author. I 
wish I could give you more definite information. 

Yours very truly, 

D. P. Corey. 

Mr. Thacher needs no introduction to the members of this 
Society. Whitefield esteemed him the ablest preacher in 
America, and his political influence and eloquence were not 
inferior to those exercised and displayed in the pulpit. 

He was chairman of the committee which reported the In- 
structions of the Town to their Representative, adopted at 
their meeting on the 23d of September, 1774, the vigorous 
close of which resembles the Instructions of 1776. " We are," 
they said, " determined in the strength of our God that we will, 
in spite of open force and private treachery, live and die as be- 
comes the descendants of such ancestors as ours, who sacrificed 
their all that they and their posterity might be free." 

They are referred to in "An Historical Discourse delivered 
at Maiden," Dec. 1, 1831, by S. Osgood Wright, and in an 
oration, delivered May 23, 1849, on the two hundredth anni- 
versary of its incorporation, by James D. Green. 

At this celebration, Gilbert Haven, Jr. (the late Bishop 
Gilbert Haven), delivered a poem, in which I find the follow- 
ing passage, apparently referring to Mr. Thacher and to the 
sentiments expressed in the Instructions of 1776 : — 

" In the same green retreat another lies, 
Who stripped, like him, all sin of its disguise ; 
And, not through sermons only, was the truth 
Announced by him, which roused both age and youth. 


His ardent feelings may be yet discerned 

In thoughts that through his brain their passage burned ; 

Closing his bold recital of great wrongs 

In words not ill-becoming martial songs, 

That they would spend for Justice' sake, with pleasure, 

' Their blood's last drop, — last farthing of their treasure.' 

Honor to him who thus his flock inflamed 

To win a cause, through earth's wide borders famed ! 

His name suggests the era when desire 

For Independence wrapt their souls in fire." 

In Mr. Haven's effort to keep the memory of Mr. Thacher 
alive, he has buried him in the wrong place, since he does not 
lie in " the same green retreat " in Maiden, but in the burying- 
ground or cemetery of the town of Milton, where, on the tablet 
of Peter Oxenbridge Thacher's tomb is found the following 
inscription : — 

"On the 22 d February A D 1827 were deposited here the remains 
of the Rev d Peter Thacher D D Pastor of the Church in Brattle Square 
in Boston who died Dec r 16 1802 aet 51 & of Elizabeth his wife who 
died Jan'y 26 1816 aet 71 years." 1 

I am not aware that these Instructions have ever been 
printed in full, (unless in the " Gazette," where I have not yet 
found them,) except in Force's "American Archives," 2 and 
in the " Bi-Centennial Book " of Maiden. 

This copy comes from an old house, now standing in the 
town of Everett, formerly the parsonage house of the Rev. 
Mr. Eliakim Willis, for some fifty years a minister in the town 
of Maiden, — a parsonage, which, during an unprosperous 
period, he was obliged to take for the arrears of his unpaid 

Mr. Willis had a niece, Sarah Willis, who is said to have 
been a person of great beauty. She married the Rev. Nahum 
Sargeant, a nephew of Ezra Sargeant, to whom the Instruc- 
tions were addressed, by whom she had two daughters, Martha 
Willis and Elizabeth Howse. Mrs. Sargeant inherited the 
parsonage from her uncle Willis, and resided there, with her 
daughters, until the time of her death. She married, for her 
second husband, Colonel Popkin, 3 a widower, who had three 

1 As Dr. Thacher was horn March 21, 1752, he died in his fifty-first year 
within hut little more than three months of its completion. 

2 Vol. vi. p. 602. 

8 Ante, pp. 76, 250, 251. — Eds. 


sons. By him she had one child, Ebenezer Willis Popkin, who 
died in the parsonage, December, 1883, at a very advanced age. 

One of the sons of Colonel Popkin by his first wife was the 
Rev. John Snelling Popkin, who was graduated at Harvard 
College in the class of 1792. He was appointed tutor in 
Greek in the College in 1795, University Professor of Greek 
in 1815, and Eliot Professor of Greek Literature in 1826. 
This chair he held until 1833. He received from the College 
the degree of S.T.D. in 1815. He was also a member of 
this Society. 

I trust it will not be inconsistent with the dignity of our 
Proceedings to add that Colonel Popkin and his son Professor 
Popkin were contemporaneous lovers of the beautiful Sarah 
Willis Sargeant, and that the son never married. 

The eager devotion of the citizens of Maiden to their own 
freedom and independence was not thought inconsistent with 
the existence of slavery in their midst, although, perhaps, it 
was that feeling which, more or less unconsciously, elevated 
the slave to the familiarity of a freedman. The story is told 
of a worthy citizen, who pompously announced to an aged 
slave of seventy years : " You have been a faithful servant 
to me and my father before me. I have long been thinking 
what I should do to reward you for your services. I give 
you your freedom ! You are your own master ! You are 
your own man ! " The prospective freeman, however, pre- 
ferred to remain dependent, and not to sacrifice what was 
now his all, simply that he might become free, — free to take 
care of himself at his own expense. " No, no, massa ! " said 
he, slyly ; " you eat de meat, and now you must pick de 

Mr. Goodell presented the following communication : 1 — 

I rise to offer for publication in our Proceedings transcripts 
of certain manuscripts which have never to my knowledge 
been printed in full. These have a bearing upon the contro- 
versy between our accomplished Corresponding Member, Dr. 
Moore, and myself, respecting some incidents of the witch- 
trials of 1692, and the subsequent reversal of the attainders 
of the condemned. 

1 This paper was communicated by title at the October meeting, but its pub- 
lication has been necessarily delayed. — Eds. 


The first is a letter from Governor Phips to the Earl of Not- 
tingham, copied for me from the archives of the Public Record 
Office in London by Mr. Sainsbury. 1 

The copious extracts from this letter, first given to the pub- 
lic in Palfrey's " History of New England," 2 show that Phips 
accused the Lieutenant-Governor (Stoughton) of causing " the 
estates, goods and chattels of the executed to be seized and 
disposed of" without his consent. This is a sufficiently dis- 
tinct, authoritative, and contemporaneous averment that for- 
feiture or escheat, or both, were not only supposed by the 
highest judicial authority of the province to properly follow 
attainder for witchcraft, but were actually enforced by legal 
process. Another clause, not printed by Dr. Palfrey, shows 
the Governor's commendable desire to have all proceedings 
in the court of oyer and terminer here, stayed, until advice 
could be obtained from the judges in England as to the practice 
there in trials for witchcraft : — 

Boston in New England Feb r 7 21st. 169|. 
May it please yof Lords h . p 

By the Cap n of yf Samuell & Henry I gave an account that att my 
arrivall here I found y e Prisons full of people coiriitted upon suspition 
of witchcraft & that continuall complaints were made to me that many 
persons were grievously tormented by witches & that they cryed out 
upon severall persons by name, as y? cause of their torments yf number 
of these complaints increasing every day, by advice of y e Lieut Gov!" & 
y e Councill I gave a Comission of Oyer and Terminer to try yf sus- 
pected witches & at that time the generality of yf People represented 
yf matter to me as reall witchcraft & gave very strange instances of 
the same The first in Comission was yf Lieut. Gov? & yf rest persons 
of y e best prudence & figure that could then be pitched upon & I de- 
pended upon yf Court, for a right method of proceeding in cases of 
witchcraft At that time I went to comaiid the army at yf Eastern part 
of the Province for yf French and Indians had made an attack upon 
some of our Fronteer Towns, I continued there for some time but 
when I returned I found people much disatisfied at yf proceedings of y? 
Court for about Twenty persons were condemned & executed of which 
number some were thought by many persons to be innocent The 
Court still proceeded in yf same method of trying them which was by 
yf evidence of yf afflicted persons who when they were brought into 

1 America and West Indies, No. 591 ; also in Colonial Entry's Book, No. 62, 
p. 426. 
2 Vol. iv. p. 112, note. 


yf Court as soon as the suspected witches looked upon them instantly 
fell to yf ground in strange agonies & grievous torments, but when 
touched by them upon yf arme or some other part of their flesh they 
ifhediately revived & came to themselves, upon x they made oath that 
y e Prisoner at y e Bar did afflict them & that they saw their shape or 
spectre come from their bodies which put them to such paines & tor- 
ments : When I enquired into yf matter I was enformed by y c Judges 
that they begun with this, but had humane testimony against such as 
were condemned & undoubted proof of their being witches, but at 
length I found that the Devill did take upon him y e shape of Innocent 
persons & some were accused of whose innocency I was well assured 
& many considerable persons of unblameable life & conversation were 
cried out upon as witches & wizards The Deputy Gov r notwithstand- 
ing persisted vigorously in y e same method to yf great disatisfaction & 
disturbance of y e people untill I put an end to y e Court & stopped y 8 
proceedings which I did because I saw many innocent persons might 
otherwise perish & at that time I thought it my duty to give an account 
thereof that their Ma*! 8 pleasure might be signifyed hoping that for the 
better ordering thereof yf Judges learned in the law in England might 
give such rules & directions as have been practized in England for 
proceedings in so difficult & so nice a point ; When I put an end to 
yf Court there were at least fifty persons in prison in great misery by 
reason of the extream cold & their poverty most of them having only 
spectre evidence against them & their mittimusses being defective I 
caused some of them to be lett out upon bayle & put y e Judges upon 
considering of a way to reliefe others & prevent them from perishing 
in prison, upon which some of them were convinced & acknowledged 
that their former proceedings were too violent & not grounded upon a 
right foundation but that if they might sit againe, they would proceed 
after another method & whereas M' Increase Mathew 2 & severall 
other Divines did give it as their Judgment that y e Devill might afflict 
in yf shape of an innocent person & that y e look & y e touch of y e sus- 
pected persons was not sufficient proofe against them, these things had 
not y e same stress layd upon them as before & upon this consideration 
I permitted a spetiall Superior Court to be held at Salem in yf County 
of Essex on yf third day of January yf Lieut Gov' being Chief Judge 
their method of proceeding being altered, all that were brought to tryall 
to yf number of fifety two, were cleared saving three & I was enformed 
by the Kings Attorny Generall that some of yf cleared and yf con- 
demned were under yf same circumstances or that there was yf same 
reason to clear yf three condemned as yf rest acording to his Judgment 
The Deputy Gov 1 ; signed a Warrant for their speedy execucon & also 

1 Sic : " which " omitted ? 2 Sic in copy. 


of five others who were condemned at y? former Court of Oyer & 
terminer but considering how y? matter had been managed I sent a 
reprieve whereby y? execucon was stopped untill their Maj. pleasure be 
signified & declared the Lieut. Gov. upon this occasion was inraged & 
filled with passionate anger & refused to sitt upon y? bench in a Supe- 
rior Court then held at Charles Towne & indeed hath from the begin- 
ning hurried on these matters with great precipitancy & by his warrant 
hath caused the estates, goods & chatties of y? executed to be seized & 
disposed of without my knowledge or consent, the stop put to yf first 
method of proceedings hath dissipated y? blak cloud that threatened this 
Province with destruccon ; for whereas this delusion of y? Devill did 
spread & its dismall effects touched yf lives & estates of many of their 
Ma*! 8 Subjects & y e reputacon of some of y? principall persons here & 
indeed unhappily clogged and interrupted their Ma*! 8 affaires which 
hath been a great vexation to me ! I have no new complaints but peo- 
ples minds before divided and distracted by differing opinions concern- 
ing this matter are now well composed 

I am 

YoT Lordships most faith full 
humble Servant 

William Phips 
[Addressed] To the Rt. Hon ble 

the Earle of Nottingham 

att Whitehall 

[Indorsed] R [i. e., received] May 24, 93 
ah*. Witches 

The second paper has a less obvious but not less important 
bearing upon the same subject. It is the petition of Elizabeth 
Proctor to the General Court at the May session of 1696 : — 

To the Honourable Generall Court Asembled at Boston may twenty 
seventh 1696 

the Humble petetion of Elizabeth procter widow and Relect of John 
procter of Salem decesed Humbly Sheweth 

that in the yere of our Lord 1692 when many persons in salem and in 
other towns ther about were accused by som euill disposed or strangly 
Influenced persons ; as being witches or for being guilty of acting witch- 
craft my sd Husband John procter and my selfe were accused as such and 
we both: my sd Husband and my selfe were soe farr proceded against 
that we were Condemned but in that sad time of darknes before my said 
husband was executed it is euident som body had Contriued awill and 
brought it to him to signe wher in his wholl estat is disposed of not hauing 
Regard to acontract in wrighting mad with me before mariag with him ; 


but soe it pleased god to order by his providenc that although the sentanc 
was executed on my dere husband yet through gods great goodnes to your 
petetioner I am yet aliue ; sine my husbands death the sd will is proued 
and aproued by the Judg of probate and by that kind of desposall the 
wholl estat is disposed of; and although god hath Granted my life yet 
those that Claime my sd husbands estate by that which thay Call awill 
will not suffer me to haue one peny of the estat nither vpon the acount 
of my husbands Contract with me before mariage nor yet vpon the 
acount of the dowr which as I humbly Coceiue doth belong or ought to 
belong to me by the law for thay say that I am dead in the law and ther 
fore my humble Request and petetion to this Honoured Generall Court 
is that by an act of this honoured Court as god hath Contenewed my 
life and through gods goodnes without feare of being put to death vpon 
that sentanc yow would be pleased to put me Into acapacity to mak 
vse of the law to Recouer that which of Right by law I ought to have 
for my nessesary suple and support that as I your petetioner am one of 
his majestyes subjects I may haue the benifett of his laws soe Humbly 
prayeng that god would direct your honnours in all things to doe that 
which may be most pleasing to him I subscrib 

your honnours humble petetioner 

Elizabeth Procter 
Read. 10 th June. 1696. in Council. 1 

This petition was read in Council June 10, 1696, as appears 
by the above memorandum thereon. On the 28th of Septem- 
ber the following entries appear in the legislative records of 
the Council : — 

" Several Petitions were read and debated and Sent down to the 
House of Representatives. 

" The Report of a Committee Appointed by the Board at the former 
Sessions of this Court upon Several petitions presented and lying under 
Consideration was read and Sent down." 2 

Unfortunately the Representatives did not begin to print 
their journals until 1715. There is, however, no question that 
such records were kept from colonial times ; but, not having 
been duplicated for the use of the Privy Council, probably all 
of them prior to 1715 perished irretrievably, with many other 
most valuable memorials of our early history, in the fire which 
destroyed the Court House in 1747. No clew, therefore, can 

1 Mass. State Archives, vol. exxxv. p. 109. 

2 Legislative Records of the Council, vol. vi. p. 447. 


be obtained from that source to aid us in tracing to their end 
the proceedings thus briefly minuted in the records of the 
Council, or in ascertaining the purport of either of the peti- 
tions which were thus recorded as having been sent down for 
the consideration of the Representatives. 

Some light, however, may be obtained from another quarter. 
The will of John Proctor, the husband of the above petitioner, 
had been admitted to probate in the Probate Court of Essex 
County, March 22, 1694-5, upon the complaint of Thomas 
Very and Elizabeth, his wife (who was a daughter of the tes- 
tator), against the executors ; and a committee had reported 
to the court, April 15, 1695, a division of the estate according 
to the will. After this last proceeding, and before the execu- 
tors had rendered their account, the widow made the above 
application to the General Court. 

Now, it is more reasonable to suppose that the devisees 
under John Proctor's will had procured some legislative action 
annulling the effect of his attainder, before they proceeded to 
demand the probate of the will, than that the judge of pro- 
bate should have admitted that instrument to probate, re- 
gardless of the known attainder of the testator and the 
consequent forfeiture and escheat of his lands. 

This surmise is strongly corroborated by the circumstance 
that the widow presented the above petition to the General 
Court, as well as by the subsequent action of the judge of 
probate. If the husband's disability had been removed, the 
widow, upon her application for dower (which I will presently 
consider), would have had it assigned to her, unless prevented 
by some other cause. But it will be remembered that she too 
had been attainted, and that therefore it was not enough that 
her husband had been reinstated: it was also necessary for 
her to apply to be similarly restored ; otherwise she was barred 
by her own attainder, and was — as she complains the claim- 
ants of her husband's estate charged her with being — "dead 
in the law." 

Keeping these facts in mind, let us now turn to the probate 
records of Essex County, in search of a clew which the rec- 
ords and files in the State Archives fail to furnish. Here we 
find what certainly seems a probable solution of the mystery 
which involves the doings of the legislature respecting the 
above-named petitions after they had been sent down from the 


Council, and reasonably conclusive evidence that the prayer 
of the widow's petition to the legislature was granted. 

I cannot better show this than by giving, verbatim, as the 
third paper of this series, the record of the decree or " advice " 
of the judge of probate upon her petition for assignment of 
dower; only premising that Bartholomew Gedney, at that 
time Judge of Probate for Essex County, had been one of the 
justices of the court of oyer and terminer for the trial of the 
alleged witches, and that from the arrival of the charter until 
1698 he was one of the Provincial Council, — the body which 
had considered the widow's petition to the General Court, and 
sent it down to the House for their action. In the absence of 
the record, there could be no better evidence than his personal 
knowledge, of the legislative proceedings of 1696. The pro- 
bate record reads as follows : — 

" April 19, 1697. Whereas Elizabeth Proctor, Relict, Widow of John 
Proctor Late of Salem dec? praying that a citation might go forth to 
the executors of the dec? to Render an accompt of their Executor- 
ship &c* who appear this day & say that their is no more or other Estate 
of the dec? 8 Come to their hands or possession more than what was 
given in |) Inventory: & the said Widow being restored to the benifit 
of the law the Judge's advice to the Executor is that they Render the 
s d Widow her Dowry in the said Estate." 1 

Probably — it may be said, most likely — the legislature very 
soon began to relieve the embarrassments of courts, and of 
parties in judicial proceedings, and the distresses of heirs and 
others, caused by the judgments of the court of oyer and ter- 
miner. At all events, I think it will not be denied that the 
above extracts not only fairly establish the fact that Elizabeth 
Proctor had the relief she sought for, but furnish some reason 
for supposing that her husband's will was probated under a 
similar legislative proceeding, which, in the absence of more 
direct evidence, we are warranted in presuming to have 
taken place. 

Neither should these facts be disregarded in forming .a 
theory to explain why, after the disallowance of the " act 
setting forth general privileges," 2 corruption of blood, and 
escheats, as incidents to attainder for felony do not appear 

1 Essex Co. Probate Records, book 305, p. 252, new numbers. 

2 1692-93, chap. 11. 



to have been enforced by the courts throughout the subse- 
quent history of the province. It is possible that the pro- 
visions of this act were revived and continued by a resolve, 
of which there is no existing record. Indeed, this resolve 
may have been a part of the legislation immediately following 
the petition of the widow Proctor, and by a common misfor- 
tune it may have shared the fate of the lost resolve which 
restored her forfeited rights. By that time information had 
been received from England of the disallowance of the " act 
setting forth general privileges " ; and a prompt remedy may 
have been applied by way of resolve, which the Lieutenant- 
Governor, then acting as chief magistrate, would not be loath 
to approve, and which, if it did not clearly appear in the 
minutes of the Council, would escape the animadversions of 
the law officers of the crown. If the provisions of this act 
were not kept alive in some such way, it is difficult to account 
for the opinion which seems to have been held by the old 
lawyers of this State, that the act remained in force until it 
was superseded by similar provisions in the Constitution. 1 

The fourth paper offered is the following petition of John 
and Joseph Parker, which gives an instructive glimpse of the 
manner in which the sheriff proceeded against the " estates" 
of the attainted. It does not appear that Mary Parker was 
seized of any real estate at the time of her attainder ; and this 
petition, therefore, may be of service to those who contend 
that the word " estates " was not used in a technical sense in 
any of the proceedings relative to witchcraft. To this point 
it may be properly said in reply, that this was the petition of 
persons evidently not skilled in the niceties of legal language, 
and therefore is not a standard for determining the intended 
significance of words used some fifteen years later in a formal 
act of legislation. 

The declaration that the petitioners "know not of any law 
in force in this Province " by which the estate of their mother 
should be forfeited upon her condemnation, is evidently 
grounded upon the "act setting forth general privileges," 
which had become a law nearly one month before their peti- 
tion was filed, and probably before some of the acts and de- 
mands complained of against the sheriff had been made and 

1 See Sullivan's History of Land Titles, p. 385 ; Ancient Laws and Charters 
(by Dane, Prescott, and Story), p. 214. 

1881. J 


committed. By this act, as we have seen, all forfeitures and 
escheats, and all corruption of blood, except in cases of treason, 
had been abolished. 

To his Excellency the Governo r , and Councill and Representatives, now- 
sitting in Boston 

the humble Petition of John Parker, & Joseph Parker of Andover 

That whereas our mother Mary Parker of Andover, was apprehended 
upon Suspition of Witchcraft, and being brought to a tryall at Salem 
Court, was condemned : Since her Death the Sherriff of Essex Sent 
an officer to seise on her estate. The said officer required us in their 
majestyes name to give him an Account of our mothers estate, pretend- 
ing it was forfeited to y e King ; we told him that our mother left no 
estate; (which we are able to make appear) notwithstanding which, 
he seised upon our Cattell, Corn & hay, to a considerable value : and 
ordered us to go down to Salem and make an agreement with y e Sher- 
rife, otherwise the estate would be expos'd to Sale. We not knowing 
what advantage the Law might give him against us, and fearing we 
Should Sustain greater Dammage by y e loss of our estate, went to the 
Sherriff accordingly, who told us he might take away all that was seis'd, 
if he pleas'd but was willing to do us a kindness by giveing us an op- 
pertunity to redeem it. He at first demanded ten pounds of us, but at 
length was willing to take Six pounds, which he has oblig'd us by Bill 
to pay him within a moneth. Now if our Mother had left any estate, 
we know not of any Law in force in this Province, by which it Should 
be forfeited upon her condemnation ; much less can we understand that 
there is any Justice or reason, for y e Sherriff to Seise upon our 

And tho it is true ou r own act has obliged us to pay him a Summ of 
money, yet we declare that we were drawn to it partly by the officers 
great pretences of Law for what hedid, partly to prevent y e loss of our 
estate which we feard would be immediately Sold. 

Now we humbly pray this Hon r ed Court to consider our case, and if 
it be judged that So much money ought not to have been demanded of 
us, upon the forementioned account : we pray that we may be discharg'd 
from that obligation, which the Sherriff, takeing advantage of our igno- 
rance hath brought us under. And yo r Petition's as in duty bound 
shall ever pray &c. — 

John Parker. 
Dated at AndoV JOSEPH Parker. 

7 th Novemb. 1692.1 

1 Mass. State Archives, vol. exxxv. p. 65. 


Lastly, I offer the following transcript and translation of the 
questions propounded by Joseph Dudley to the Dutch and 
French clergymen of New York, in October, 1G92, on the sub- 
ject of witchcraft, in order to procure better direction in future 
trials of the accused in Massachusetts. I have, in like man- 
ner, added the answers of the clergy to whom these questions 
were addressed. The Collections of the New York Historical 
Society for 1869 contain an imperfect abstract of these ques- 
tions and answers, found among the papers of the Rev. John 
Miller, who was chaplain to the royal forces in New York 
from 1692 to 1695 ; but I do not know that they have ever 
been printed in full. These answers are important, as be- 
ing, according to Cotton Mather, one of the causes which 
led Phips to first reprieve, and then pardon, many of the 
condemned. 1 

De veneficio qucestiones ReuerendiJJimis e Belgio et gallia Theologis propositce. 

Apud N. Ebor. 
5° octob. 1692. 

1. Au concedatur quasdam per omnes estates a primo hominis lapsu 
a Deo derelictas ita efse, vt fe Dasmonis Seruitio (quo facilius mali- 
tiam aduersus sodales perpetrent) penitus dedissent, vulgo veneficas 

2. Vbi vera et formalis veneficii natura (qva data aut fubla) [sublata] 
veneficium denominatur vere confistit. 

3. An ad veneficii conuictionem Diabolicis et prasternaturalibus in cru- 
ciatos actionibus, malitia, ininiicitia, et maledictio prasuia fit probanda, 
an rationabiliter tantum vt plurimum expectanda. 

4. An phantasma Seu apparitio cujusdam cruciatis vim et Jnjuriam 
Jnstanter ferentis absque malitia et minis prasuiis ipsum illud Spec- 
trum afflictorum oculis aut Jmaginationi propositum, fit justa veneficas 

5. An cum Sacrosancto Dei omnipotentis mundi regimine fistere possit 
Dinbolo veniam dare innocentium formas et figuras cruciatorum oculis 
aut imaginationi proponere veluti authores et Jnstrumenta passionum. 

6. an talis etiam exinde apparitio fit justa veneficii conuictio necne. 

7. Num contra longam Seriem justas Christianas et charitatis plenas 
vitas apud homines approbatam valeat grauis afflictorum criminatio venefi- 
cium euincere, prassertim vbi nulla prasuia malitia innotescit. 

8. An hujusmodi cruciati continua poena lacerati, convulfi et multis 
miseriis pluribus menfibus contriti diluantur, minuantur, avt etiam mag- 

1 See Mather's Life of Phips, 1697, p. 79; and again in "The Magnalia," Hart- 
ford edition, 1820, vol. i. bk. ii. p. 191. 


nam naturalium Spirituum turn corporis, turn anima? confumptionem 
luant necne. Finaliter graucm fuspicionis causam prsebeat etiam afllictis 
ijniorantibus Dasmonis illufioncm Jnstare. 

Ad prcecedentes quccstiones breuis responfio. 

Respondetur ad primam quaestionem, plurimos, qvi negativam par- 
tem amplexi funt, extitifse ; inter quos Plinius ille Mysteriorum natural 
Jndagator, fed eximius mendax primum obtinuit locum, fed qvid mirum ? 
cum fuerint et Sint adhuc Jmpii qvi Deum efse negent, etsi natura 
rerum, omnium populorum confenfus, ipsa Jmproborum conscientia 
et variie Divinoa reuelationes aduersus Jmpium dogma Jnvictiffime 

Verum maxima pars virorum doctorum Saniorem mentem babentes 
contrariam Jniere Sententiam. Et reuera qvi potest in dubium vocari 
qvin fint, qvi cum Diabolo immediatum commercium habeant, nifi privs 
lex et Evangelium Dei merae existimentur fabulae, omnium populorum 
consensus vt pura puta Stultitia dejiciatur, et ratio humana prorfus 

Nam Si Diabolum efse Supponas (quod nifi fieri velis Jmpius fup- 
ponere debes) eumq creaturam fumme mifera, Jnvidam, astutam et 
potentem, nullum lapidem ad explendam Jnvidiam, et miferiam propriam 
qvodam modo miseroru confortio subleuandam mouere non debet, ten- 
tabit homines et in castra Sva trahere conabitur, vt exinde in idem 
Barathrum fecum protrudat. Jn hunc finem mendaciis, praestigiis, pro- 
mifsionibus, voluptatibus aut fictis aut veris, honoribus, diuitiis aliisq 
innumeris vtetur illecebris. qvid ! eruntne tot et tantce tentationes Sem- 
per irritse ? proasertim in homines carnales et Sensuum voluptatibus 
deditos ! in eos Jmprimis, qvi nihil nisi praesentia curant. hoc verisi- 
mile non est. igitur pro hominum moribus et astutia potentiaq Diaboli, 
efse homines qvi cum Diabolo commercium immediatum habeant con- 
cludes possumus. Astipulatur rationi confenfus omnium populorum. 
qvid ? an verum non est qvod omnes gentes verum efse testantur. meri- 
tiffimo jure credimvs efse Deum, quia nullus fuit Jnquam populus qui 
Deum efse faffus non fuerit. verum praasumi debet, quod a Duobus vel 
tribus dicitur efse verum, multo magis qvod vnanimi consensu populorum 
afseritur. Jam autem fi hoc non fuit populorum fententia inter homi- 
nes efse quosdam qvi cum Diabolo immediate communicent, cur Singula? 
gentes quaedam nomina propria et aptata ad tales homines Jndicandos 
habuere? veluti ^1K inter hebragos, IIv6W, vel ^ap/xaKoywrj [sic] inter 
grsecos, Sage et venefica Jnter Romanos &c. eruntne mera nomina et 
voces absque fundamento fictae? fed accedit qvod leges aduerfus tales 
homines lata? fuerint, vt ipse plinius refert de quodam Crefino, qvi 
coactvs est vt fe veneficii criuaine purgaret, coram Judicibus comparers 
Phn. lib. 18. 6. 


Jn promptu efset multorum exempla narrare, qvi arte Diabolica fibi 
famam compararunt, vt mulieris illius, qvae vt ait Acron, cartninibus 
et herbis mala hominibus accessere vel pellere dicebatur, et ejus iterum, 
qua3 Juxta Apul. poterat coelum deponere, terram fufpendere, fontes 
durare, montes diluere, manes Sublimare, Deos Jnfirmare; fed qvis 
efset narrandi finis. Consensum populorum excipiunt lex et Euange- 
lium. tempore Mofis veneficos fuifse nemo negauit, fiqvidem, Mofe ipso 
referente, prasstigiatrices et Spiritum Pythonis habente[s] mandato Dei 
morte plecti deberent; Exo. 22. Deu. 20 [sic]. — Erant etiam certe 
tempore Saulis, cum et ipse Pythoniffa confuluerit, Quid ! nonne patet 
Scriptis Prophetarum ^Egyptios, chananaeos, Philistasos, Sydonios, Ty- 
rios, Moabitas, Ammonitas, Jdumaeos et ipsos Jsraelitas praestigiis et 
prsestigiatoribus fuifse deditos ? certe illi prasstigiatores et Spiritum 
Pythonis habentes aut nihil erant praster ficta nomina, aut commercium 
Jmmediatu cum diabolo habebant. Jdem narraonibus Euangelicis euin- 
citur. tempore christi et Apostolorum praastigiatores erant et Pythonis- 
sae. hoc tarn clare patet euangelistarum et Apostolorum acta et Scripta 
legentibus, vt locis indicandis operam nauandam non existimen. 

Possemus etiam, fi liberet aeui nostri de fagis et proestigiatoribus 
historias narrare, fed nullvs efset narrandi finis ; legantur hemmingivs 
de Magia, et Dangeus de fortiariis. 

ad 2 am quaBs^ 
Respondetur rationem formalem venefici [s?'c] in confeederaone cum 
Diabolo confistere. Jn eo Scilicet quod homo Jmperium Dei creatoris 
nostri ac fupremi Regis, cui ratione dependentise nostras in omnibus 
obedire, et cujus gloriam pro virili aduerfvs ejus hostes tueri tenemur, 
[deserit] in Jn \_sic~] Castra Diaboli aduerfvs Deum militaturus tranfit, 
vt Jmperium Diaboli quantum in fe est ampliet et Stabiliat. Jn cujus 
defectionis compensationem, ad implendas libidines fvas opem Diabolus 
illi vicissim promittit. Jtaq ex una parte homo Jugum Dei excutit 
praeceptis ejus et promissionibus valedicens, vt totum fe Diabolo man- 
cipet eumque Loco Dei habeat; et ex altera parte, unam hominis 
libidinem aut plures aut omnes Se expleturum Diabolus Spondet. 

ad 3 am quassti. 
Respondetur cum inimicitia aut malitia praeuia indicium certum ad 
aliquem veneficii conuincendum minime praebeat ; fiqvidem et vir bonus 
Jnimicitiam aduerfus proximum concipere possit, et nocendi Studium 
fouere, et homo malus et Diabolicus artem pefsimam fub amicitia et 
beneuolentia ficta occultare ; nihil efse inquirendum cle malitia praevia in 
eo, qvi arte Diabolica et actionibus praeternaturalibus hominibus mala 
accessere legitime conuinci potest. Nam in tali homine nocendi Stu- 
dium tanquam in mancipio Diaboli supponendum est, quibuscunq 



modis prauitatem Suam occultare conetur. haec enim est ars Diaboli 
et mancipiorum ejus vt quantum fieri potest aniraum et oculos perspi- 
cacium fallant et omnem amoueant Suspicionem. 

ad 4 am quaes. 
Respondetur ad conuictionem veuefici aut veneficae nullo modo SufTi- 
cere Phantasma feu apparitionem cujusdam vim et Jnjuriam cruciatis 
instanter facientis, etiam fi Jnimicitia et minoe praecefserint. ratio est 
qvia Diabolus viri boni Speciem potest Jnduere et illam cruciatorum 
oculis tanquam principium afflictionum, quas patiuntur, intentare. fi enim 
ocvlis Saulis viri Dei demortui Samuel is objicere potuit, qvidni viri Dei 
viuentis figuram oculis eorum, quos. Jmmediate vexat intentare poterit, 
vt odium, masrorem, vincula, et etiam mortem accersat illis ; nee ad 
inimicitiam praeviam vel minas attendendum est, qvia ha3C pariter in 
virum probum et improbum cadere possunt. 

ad o am quaes. 
Respondetur minime aduersari Sanctifsimo Dei regimini qvod vexare 
aliquem induta viri cujusdam boni imagine Diabolo permittat. vt Deus 
est Supremus mundi Monarcha et fummum jus habet in creaturas, 
haec pariter illi licent et creaturam affligere, et ad id quibuslibet Jn- 
strumentis vti, praesertim cum malum in bonum mutandi calleat artem 
peritiffime. et qvidqvid agit propter bonos fines agat. Jobum virum 
fanctum mirum in modum vexandi Diabolo licentiam dedit, et per 
tentationis euentum gloriam suam illustrauit, patientiam et virtu tern 
ferui Sui manifestauit, et Satanam confudit. cum Diabolus Dominum 
nostrum I. C. in deferto tentauit oculis ejus Jdeam et imaginem totius 
mundi Jmperioru ostentauit. hoc nullam aspersit labem regimini Dei, 
qvi paffus est vt inimievs Jnfensissimus in dilectum fuum imagine 
mundi abuteretur, cur igitur aduersaretur ejus Jmperio Sanctissimo fi 
viri boni imagine diabolu abuti patiatur? Verum dices, Deo ita per- 
mittente, virum bonum in odium et vitae discrimen immerito venturum ; 
qvid ! turn post ea ? an non licebit Deo virum peccatorem etfi fidelem 
et pium in hoc calamitosum vitas genvs detrudere, ad tentendam ejus 
pietatem et virtutem ? nonne Job vir Sanctifsimus ab amicis Suis prop- 
ter calamitosam conditionem Suam et contemptus et Lacefsitus fuit? 
Certe talem tantam calamitatem vir pivs et Sanctus nullo modo merue- 
rat. Jtaque fi Semel Deum posse creaturam immerentem affligere 
concefseris, vt illi liceat qvibvsuis instrumentis vti illico concedas opor- 
tet. hie autem creaturam immerentem voco, non qvae ab omni labe 
prorsus Sit immunis ; nulla enim talis est inter homines, fed qvae patitur 
ob injusta et falsam accufationem, talem autem creaturam affligi Deus 
pati potest pro Summo Suo Jure etfi talem afflictionis speciem, habito 
hominum respectu non fit commerita. 


ad 6 am qvaesti. 
Respondetur quum nihil impediat qvin Diabolus Jmpostor et praesti- 
giator oculos et phantafiam hominum fascinare valeat, et imaginem viri 
boni iis quos ipse immediate vexat, intentare, vt fupra obferuatum est ; 
maxime Jmprudentiae foret talem hominem vt veneficum condemnare 
propter hanc raonem, qvod ejus imago cruciatis, dam patiuntur, obuer- 
setur. Jn hoc cafu Judices perspicaces et cauti efse debent, ne confdio 
et astutire Daemonis Jmprudentes faueant ; nam dvo fimul Jntendere 
potest, Scilicet vnum vexare ad alterius imaginis prefentiam, et ilium 
cujus imaginem protendit in malam famam et vitae discrimen conjicere, 
est enim et mendax, et tortor, et homicida. 

ad 7 am 
Respondetur longuam [sic] vitae probae et charitatis plenae feriem et 
modum vivendi omnibus probatum a veneficii accufatis cruciatorum testi- 
monio, criminis Jntentati fuspicionem probabiliter amouere ; vix enim fieri 
potest vt qvi in Diaboli castris militat, Speciem militis christi diu valeat 
efflngere. verum tamen hoc indicium certum et indubitatum falsae cri- 
minationis efse non existimem ; qvia non video, cur homo astutus artes 
Diabolicas fub bonae vitae Specie, vt fufpicionem et justam condemua- 
tionem efFugiat occultare non possit. ipse Diabolus verum aliqvando 
dicit, et bonum morale concionatur vt facilius et cautius fallat. 

ad 8™ qvaest. 
Respondetur fieri posse vt qvi reuera a Diabolo cruciantur, convel- 
luntur et multis miferiis per plures menses affliguntur nullam corporis 
diminutionem, nullamque Spirituum debilitatem patiantur. ratio est quia 
Stomacha nullam laesionem patiente nutritio potest efse perfecta ; Jmo 
Diabolo Sic procurante Stomachus cruciatorum validior factus majorem 
alimentorum copiam appetet et deglutiet qvam antea Solebat, et ea 
perfecte deqvoquendo et digerendo omne damnum per cruciatus illatum 
facili negotio refarciet. Deinde dubitandum non est quin Diabolus, Deo 
ita permittente, Spirituum naturalium dissipationem Jmpedire valeat. 
Ego alias me hominem mania affectum vidifse testor, qvi Singulis 
menfibus cir[c]a plenilunium per octo dies per montes et campos vaga- 
batur nullum alimentum per id tempus deglutiens praeter aquam, qvi 
tamen nee corporis, nee roboris, nee faciei coloris diminutionem aut 
mutationem patiabatur. Spiritus naturales non folum inedia non fran- 
gebantur, fed vi morbi in Statu et conditione nativa retinebantur. qvod 
autem caufa qvodam modo naturalis praestat, Diabolu praestare posse non 
dubito, cum et actiuis pafsiva et pafsivis activa adaptare bene novit. 



has proecedentes Solutiones ad quaestiones propofitas vt veras no" Jnfra 
Scripti approbamus. 

in nostro Henricus Selijns 1 ^^ Neo . Eborenfe3 . 

congressu Petrus Peiretus ) 

ecclesiasti[c]o Godefridus Dellius 

11 Octob. 1G92. Belg. Ecclae. Neo Alb Min: 


Min in Midwoort 

Questions concerning Witchcraft, laid before the most reverend clergy from 
Belgium and France. 
At New York 
Oct. 5, 1692. 

1. Whether it is indisputable that in all ages, since the first fall of 
man, some women, commonly called witches, have been so abandoned by 
God, that they have given themselves wholly to the service of the 
Devil, in order the more easily to exercise their malice against their 
fellow-men ? 

2. Wherepn] does the exact and formal nature of Witchcraft (that 
which, whether given or tendered, is called witchcraft) truly consist? 

3. Whether in order to convict of Witchcraft by Diabolical and 
preternatural acts towards the tormented, it is necessary to prove pre- 
vious malice enmity and cursing, or whether these are to be reasonably 
presumed, [as] in most cases ? 

4. Whether the spectre or apparition of one who has previously 
neither shown malice nor made threats, put before the eye or imagina- 
tion of the afflicted, as immediately exercising force and injury upon 
them, is sufficient for a just conviction of a witch? 

5. Whether giving the Devil permission to place before the eyes or 
the imagination of the afflicted the forms and figures of innocent per- 
sons, as the authors and instruments of their sufferings, is consistent 
with the holy government of the world by Almighty God ? 

6. Further, whether or not such an apparition is of itself sufficient 
for a just conviction of witchcraft ? 

7. Whether a serious accusation by the afflicted is sufficient to prove 
witchcraft, against a long continued consistent, just, Christian life, full 
of charity, and approved by mankind, where no previous malice is 
made known ? 

8. Whether or not those who are, in such manner, tortured by con- 
tinual pains, wounded, convulsed and threatened with many miseries, 
through several months, are worn out, wasted or suffer even a great loss 
of their natural spirits, bodily, as well as mental ? Finally, whether this 
does not furnish grave cause for suspicion that the Devil has exhibited 
an illusion, without the knowledge of the afflicted ? 



A Short Answer to the foregoing Questions. 

It is replied to the first question, that there have been many who 
have maintained the negative, among whom Pliny, the famous inves- 
tigator of the mysteries of nature (although an extremely menda- 
cious one), stands first. This is not to be wondered at, since there have 
been, and still are, impious men who even deny the existence of a 
God, although nature, the consent of all nations, the very consciences* 
of the wicked, and various divine revelations, militate most trium- 
phantly against this impious dogma. But the majority of the learned, 
possessing sounder minds, have adopted the contrary opinion. And, 
indeed, how can it be doubted that there are persons who have imme- 
diate commerce with the Devil, unless the divine law and gospel be 
considered as mere fables, the concurrent opinion of all nations be 
rejected as pure stupidity, and human reason totally exploded ? For, 
if you suppose the existence of a Devil (which must be supposed unless 
you intend to become impious), and that he is a most miserable, envi- 
ous, cunning and powerful creature, he is one who will leave no stone 
unturned to gratify his envy, and alleviate his own misery in some man- 
ner, by consorting with other wretches ; he will tempt men, and try to 
drag them into his camp, in order that thereafter he may thrust them 
into his own abyss. To this end, he makes use of lies, miracles, prom- 
ises, fictitious or real sensual indulgences, honors, riches, and other 
innumerable allurements. Can it be supposed that so many and great 
temptations will be ineffectual, especially with carnal men, given to sen- 
sual pleasures ? and, above all, with those who care for nothing but the 
present ? This is not probable ; therefore, in view of the common 
conduct of mankind, and the cunning and power of the Devil, we may 
conclude that there are people who have immediate commerce with the 

To this reasonable conclusion all nations consent ; and can it be sup- 
posed that that is not true, to the truth of which all nations testify ? 
We have the best right to believe that there is a God, because, 1 affirm, 
there never was a nation which has not acknowledged his existence. 
What is affirmed by two or three is presumed to be true ; how much 
more certain is that which is unanimously asserted by all nations ! But 
even if it had not been the judgment of all nations that there are those 
among men who associate immediately with the Devil, why has every 
nation had certain peculiar and fitting names to denote such people ? — 
as, for instance, 3"jJ$ with the Hebrews, HvOwv or Qap/xaKoyw-n with 
the Greeks, saga and venefica with the Romans, etc. Are these mere 
names, made up without any real foundation? But it must be added 
that laws have been made against such people ; as Pliny himself re- 
ports of a certain Cresiuus, who was compelled to appear before the 


judges, in order to clear himself from the charge of witchcraft: Plin. 
18. 6. It would be easy to relate many instances of persons who have 
acquired a reputation for devilish arts, as the woman mentioned by 
Acron, who was said to inflict upon people, or expel from them, evils 
by means of incantations and herbs ; and, again, of her, in Apulia, 
who could call down the sky, suspend the earth, render the springs 
solid, and the rocks liquid, raise the spirits of the dead, and deprive the 
gods of their power: but where shall this narrative end? 

After the consensus of all nations, come the law and the gospel. 
That witches existed in the time of Moses, no one. has denied. Moses 
himself declares that witches, and those that had the spirit of a python, 
were, by commandment of God, to be punished with death : Exod. 22 ; 
Deut. 20 [18]. Moreover, there were such in the time of Saul, since he 
himself consulted a pythoness. And is it not plain from the writings 
of the prophets, that the Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines, Sidonians, 
Tyrians, Moabites, Ammonites, Idumeans, and the Israelites them- 
selves, were given to miracles and miracle-working? Assuredly, those 
wizards, and persons having the spirit of a python, were either noth- 
ing but fictitious names, or they had immediate intercourse with the 

The Gospel narratives also prove the same thing. In the days of 
Christ and the Apostles there were miracle-workers, and women who 
were soothsayers. This is so clearly evident to every reader of the 
Acts, and the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles that I do not 
think it worth while to quote the passages. 

We might also, if we chose, recount the history of witches and wiz- 
ards in our own age ; but there would be no end of narrating. Let 
those who desire this information, read Hemming, " De Magia" and 
Daneau, " De Sortiariis" 1 

To the second question it is replied, that the formal essence of witch- 
craft consists in an alliance with the Devil ; that is to say, in that men 
[desert] the realm of God our Creator and Supreme King — whom all 
are bound to obey in everything by reason of our dependence upon 
him, and whose glory every one, to the extent of his ability, is bound 
to maintain against his enemies — and go over to the camp of the 
Devil, in order to fight against God, so as to increase and strengthen, as 

1 I gratefully acknowledge the service done me by Professor Henry W. 
Haynes, not only in carefully collating the above copy with the original manu- 
script, and in critically revising the translation, but in ascertaining for me 
the full titles of the works here referred to, and the names of their obscure 
authors, as follows : — 

Hemming, Nicolas : Admonitio de superstitionibus magicis vitandis. Hafn., 
1578. 8vo. 

Daneau, Lambert : De veneficio, quos olim sortilegos, nunc autem vulgo sortiarios 
vocant, dialogus. Genev., 1573. 8vo. 


much as they can, the kingdom of the Devil. In return for this defec- 
tion, the Devil, on his part, promises them his aid to gratify their lusts. 
Thus man, on the one part, throws off the yoke of God, bidding farewell 
to His precepts and promises, in order to belong wholly to the Devil, 
whom he holds in the place of God ; and, on the other part, the Devil 
engages to satisfy one or all or most of the lusts of the man. 

To the third question it is replied, that — since previous enmity or 
malice by no means offers certain evidence for conviction of witchcraft 
(it being possible for even a good man to conceive enmity against his 
neighbor, and to foster a desire to injure him ; and for a bad and devilish 
man to be able to conceal the very worst practices under the appear- 
ance of friendship and benevolence) — no inquiry concerning previous 
malice is necessary, in the case of one whom it is possible lawfully to 
convict of having afflicted others with evils by devilish arts, and super- 
natural actions ; for the desire to do harm must be presumed in such a 
man, (as being a slave of the Devil) though he may attempt to cover 
his wickedness by what means soever. For such is the cunning of the 
Devil, and his servants, that they deceive, as much as possible, the eyes 
and minds of the discerning, and remove all suspicion. 

To the fourth question it is replied, that the spectre or apparition of 
one who immediately works violence and injury upon the afflicted, is by 
no means sufficient to convict a wizard or a witch, although preceded 
by enmity and threats. The reason is, because the Devil can assume 
the shape of a good man, and present this shape before the eyes of the 
afflicted, as the source of the afflictions which they suffer. For, if he 
was able to place the shape ot the dead man of God, Samuel, before 
the eyes of Saul, why can he not be able to exhibit the shape of a liv- 
ing man of God to the eyes of those whom he presently afflicts, in order 
that he may bring hatred, afflictions, fetters, and even death upon them ? 
Nor is any attention to be paid to previous enmity or threats ; because 
such may befall a just man equally with a wicked man. 

To the fifth question it is replied, that it is by no means repugnant 
to God's most holy government, that he permits the Devil in the shape 
of a good man, to annoy any one. As God is the supreme monarch of 
the world, and has a sovereign right over his creatures he is at liberty 
equally to afflict his creatures and to make use of any instrument he 
may choose for this end, — especially as he is most skilful in turning 
evil into good. Whatever he does he may do for a good purpose. He 
permitted the Devil to marvellously vex the holy man, Job, and by 
the event of the temptation, illustrated his own glory, manifested the 
patience and virtue of his servant, and confounded Satan. When the 
Devil tempted our Lord Jesus Christ in the wilderness, he spread before 
his eyes the idea and image of the empires of the whole world. It did 
not affix a stain on the government of God, to suffer his most malig- 


nant enemy to abuse the image of the world against his Beloved One ; 
why, therefore, should it be deemed repugnant to his most saered 
authority, for him to allow the Devil to abuse the spectre of a good 
man ? 

But you will say, If God thus permits, a good man will incur unde- 
served hatred, and stand trial for life or death. What then ? Shall 
not God be allowed to thrust a sinful, though faithful and pious man 
into such calamitous experience in order to try his piety and virtue ? 
Was not the most holy man, Job, despised as well as reviled by his 
friends because of his miserable condition ? That pious and holy man 
had certainly in no way merited his calamities. If, therefore, you once 
concede that God can afflict an innocent creature, you must further 
admit that he is at liberty to make use of whatever instruments he 
pleases. By "an innocent creature" however, I mean here, not one 
who is entirely spotless (for such an one does not exist among men), 
but one who suffers by reason of an unjust and false accusation. But 
God, in accordance with his supreme right, can suffer such a creature 
to be afflicted although, from a human standpoint, it has not deserved 
such a kind of affliction. 

To the sixth question it is replied : although nothing hinders the 
Devil, as an impostor and juggler, from exercising the power to be- 
witch the eyes and fancy of men, and to present the spectre of a good 
man to those whom he himself is vexing, as is above observed, still to 
condemn such a man as a wizard, for the reason that his spectre is 
presented to the afflicted while they are suffering, would be the great- 
est imprudence. In such case, the judges must be astute and cautious 
lest they rashly favor the purpose and cunning of the Devil ; for he 
may intend two things at once ; namely, to vex the one, while he ex- 
hibits the spectre of the other, and so to bring the latter, whose image 
he is simulating, into bad repute and danger of his life — for he is a 
liar as well as a tormentor and murderer. 

To the seventh question it is replied, that an honest and charitable 
life and conduct, of long continuance, such as meets with universal 
approbation, probably removes the suspicion of criminal intent from 
those who are accused of witchcraft by the testimony of the afflicted ; 
for it can hardly be that he who fights in the camp of the Devil should 
have the power, for a great while, to put on the appearance of a soldier 
of Christ. Nevertheless, I should not believe this to be sure and indu- 
bitable evidence of false accusation, because I do not see why a cunning 
man may not conceal his devilish practices under the semblance of a 
good life, in order to escape suspicion and righteous condemnation. 
The Devil himself sometimes tells the truth, and proclaims good morals, 
in order the more easily and insidiously to deceive. 

To the eighth question it is replied, that it is possible for those who 


are really tortured, convulsed and afflicted by the Devil with many mis- 
eries, during several months, to suffer no wasting of the body, and no 
weakening of their spirits. The reason is, that nutrition is perfect — 
the stomach suffering no injury. On the contrary, if the Devil so pro- 
cure it, the stomach of the tortured, having become stronger, will crave 
and swallow greater quantities of nourishment than before, and will 
easily repair all the injury caused by the tortures, by perfectly digesting 
and assimilating its supply of food. Hence it is not to be doubted that 
the Devil (God permitting it), has power to prevent the impairment of 
the natural spirits. I testify that I have seen elsewhere, a man affected 
with mania who every month about the time of the full moon wan- 
dered in the mountains and through the fields, for eight days, taking 
no nourishment but water during that time, who, nevertheless, suffered 
no diminution or change either of body, vigor, or color. His natural 
spirits were not only not broken by his fasting, but were preserved in 
their normal state and condition by the power of his malady. That the 
Devil can produce that which is produced by a kind of natural cause 

I do not doubt, since he well knows how to balance liabilities with assets 
and assets with liabilities 1 

The End. 

We the undersigned affirm the above-written solutions of the ques- 
tions propounded, to be true. 

In our Henry Selijns ) ,«•. . , - x -, v , 

_ _ Y Ministers or .New York, 

church Peter Peiretus. ) 

congress, Godfrey Dellius, Minister of the Dutch 

Church at New Albany. 

II October, 1692. Rudolph Varich, 

Minister at Flatbush. 

Mr. Young presented to the Society, from Mr. T. Fales 
Gray, of Boston, a book of manuscript sermons of the Rev. Dr. 
Samuel Stillman, who, born in Philadelphia in 1737, was for 
more than forty years pastor of the First Baptist Church in 
this city, and was a most eloquent and popular preacher. He 
was one of the founders of Brown University, and he belonged 

1 From two or three conjectural translations of this passage, neither of which 
was very certain, I have adopted the above upon the authority of a friend whose 
long familiarity with Latin authors, ancient and modern, had conclusive weight 
with me on a point of such difficulty that the learned gentleman for whose care- 
ful revision of these pages I have above acknowledged my obligation would not 
attempt to decide what was the precise idea intended to be conveyed by this 

1881.] TRUMBULL PAPERS. 359 

also to the Pennsylvania Society for promoting the Aboli- 
tion of Slavery, the Relief of Free Negroes unlawfully held in 
Bondage, and for improving the Condition of the African 
Race ; and his certificate of membership in that Society was 
also presented. 

Edward Channing, Ph.D., of Cambridge, was elected a 
Resident Member of the Society. 

Mr. Deane, from the Committee on the Trumbull Papers, 
reported that a volume of them would shortly be ready for 
distribution. This volume will consist of papers relating to 
the Narragansett country, and of letters of Dr. William 
Samuel Johnson to the governors of Connecticut, from 1767 to 
1771. He was sent to London as the agent of that State to 
look after the celebrated Mohegan case before the Privy 
Council. While there, he attended the sittings of Parliament 
during the interesting period which followed the repeal of the 
Stamp Act, and in his letters he reported many speeches and 
detailed the gossip of the time. These letters are written with 
great freedom and elegance ; and it was proposed to publish 
them soon after they were obtained by this Society in 1795, 
but the consent of the writer, who Avas then President of 
Columbia College, could not be obtained. 

Dr. Ellis expressed great satisfaction that a volume from 
the Trumbull Papers, which had been long in possession of the 
Society, was to be printed ; and he hoped that other volumes 
from this large collection of historical material would soon 

Dr. E. E. Hale remarked that the report of one of the most 
brilliant of Chatham's speeches was due to the pen of Dr. 
Johnson. He said, also, that the official account of the battle 
of Bunker Hill was written by the Rev. Peter Thacher, when 
he was twenty-three years of age, and as he saw it from the 
Maiden side of the river, and that the variations in the British 
account are to be explained by the fact that it was written 
from the opposite side. 

Many interesting anecdotes and personal reminiscences were 
given by various members at this meeting. 



The usual meeting was held on Thursday, the 8th instant ; 
Dr. George E. Ellis in the chair. The President was again 
absent in consequence of ill-health ; but the Society was glad 
to learn that he was much better, and that there was reason 
to believe that he would, in time, resume his place at its 

The Recording Secretary read his report of the doings of the 
last meeting. 

The Librarian submitted the list of donors to the Library. 

The Corresponding Secretary stated that Dr. Edward Chan- 
ning had accepted his election as a Resident Member. 

The following letter from Mr. Francis Parkman was then 
read by Dr. Ellis : — 

Hon. Robert C. Winthrop, 

President of the Massachusetts Historical Society. 

Dear Sir, — I enclose herewith a list of historical manuscripts relat- 
ing to the French in America, which I beg to offer to the Society under 
the following conditions : — 

The collection, together with such additions as I may hereafter make 
to it, is to be kept together, and is to be called The Parkman Collection. 

I shall have the right of taking any part of it from the Library for 
consultation, the same to be returned when its purpose is answered. 
Respectfully yours, 

Francis Parkman. 

Boston, Jan. 8, 1885. 

List of Manuscripts given to the Massachusetts Historical Society by Francis 
Parkman, Jan. 8, 1885. 

A collection marked Canada, 1674-1712 8 vols. 

A collection marked New France, 1741-1761 12 " 

Contents of the last-named collection, unbound. 

Copies from the Bouquet and Haldimand Papers, 1756-1761 . . 1 

Copies from the Public Record Office, 1753-1760 4 

Letters of Lieutenant-Governor Dinwiddie, 1751-1755 .... 5 

Letters of Montcalm to his Family, 1756-1759 1 

Letters of Montcalm to Bourlamaque, 1756-1759 1 

1885.] MR. PARKMAN'S GIFT. 8G1 

Letters of Vaudreuil and others to Bourlamaque . 1 vol. 

Copies from the Archives Nationales, 1666-1759 1 " 

11 istoire de Montreal, par Dollier de Casson, 1040-1G72 ... 1 ** 
Letters of Washington to Colonel Bouquet, 1758, unbound. 
Supplement to Tapers from Public Record Office, " 
Thirty-five volumes and three unbound sets of papers. 

All of the above papers are copies from the original documents, and, 
with a few exceptions, they have never been printed. 

The collection in eight volumes, marked Canada, was made in 1872 
and 1873, and consists of copies of original documents in the various 
archives of Paris, chiefly those of the Marine and Colonies. 

The collection in twelve volumes, marked New Fkance, was begun 
in 1874, and consists of documents of later date than the former, drawn 
from the same sources. Both of these collections are, in the main, ad- 
ditional and supplementary to the Paris Documents copied under the 
direction of Mr. Brodhead for the State of New York. The Brodhead 
collection was made with reference to the history of that State, while 
the two collections just mentioned were made with reference to the 
history of Canada and its dependencies. 

The selections of papers from the Public Record Office at London, 
forming four volumes, were made in 1880 and 1881. 

The selections from the Bouquet and Haldimand Papers in the 
British Museum were made in 1880. 

The letters of Lieutenant-Governor Dinwiddie, in five volumes, were 
copied in the same year, at London, from Dinwiddle's letter-books. 
Most of these have since been printed. 

The letters written by Montcalm, when in America, to his wife and 
mother, were copied in 1869 from the autographs in the possession of 
his great-grandson, the present Marquis of Montcalm. 

The letters of Montcalm to Bourlamaque were copied from the auto- 
graphs in the possession of the heirs of the late Sir Thomas Phillips. 
I had known of the existence of these letters for about fifteen years, but 
could not succeed in discovering them till the summer of 1880. 

The letters of Vaudreuil, Levis, and others to Bourlamaque were 
copied at the same time from autographs also in the hands of the heirs 
of Sir Thomas Phillips. 

The collection of papers from the Archives Nationales at Paris was 
made about ten years ago. 

The History of Montreal by Dollier de Casson was copied from the 
original manuscript at the Mazarin Library, at Paris. 

The letters of Washington to Colonel Bouquet were copied in 1880 
from the autographs in the Bouquet Collection, British Museum (vol. 
21,641, Additional Manuscripts). Several of these letters have been 
printed by Dr. Sparks with considerable variations, probably due to his 



having taken them from Washington's letter-books, without having seen 
the original draughts. 

The various collections mentioned above form a part of the series of 
manuscripts collected by me since the year 1845 to illustrate the history 
of the French on this continent. 

F. Parkman. 

Jan. 8, 1885. 

Mr. Parkman, by request, then made some interesting re- 
marks in regard to these volumes ; and when he had finished, 
Dr. Ellis said that something more than a customary vote of 
thanks was due from the Society for this important and valu- 
able gift ; and accordingly it was voted that a committee, 
consisting of Dr. Ellis, Mr. Winsor, and Dr. Green, be ap- 
pointed to report and make suitable acknowledgment to the 

Dr. Ellis presented eight volumes and an atlas of stars, 
containing the results of the labors of nearly thirteen years by 
Dr. Benjamin Apthorp Gould in the National Observatory of 
the Argentine Republic. 

Mr. Robert C. Wlnthrop, Jr., communicated the follow- 
ing paper which his father had prepared for the preceding 
meeting : — 

During the late visit to New York, which, much to my 
regret, cost me the satisfaction of being present at our last 
meeting, I spent an hour at the Metropolitan Museum in 
Central Park, in looking at the interesting pictures of the em- 
inent English artist, George Frederic Watts, which have been 
brought over from London for exhibition. I do not pretend 
to be a judge of his allegorical and mythical pictures, of which 
there are many in most glowing and gorgeous coloring. But 
I cannot forbear from advising every one to pay a visit to the 
portraits ; and I should hope that our Museum of Art might 
obtain them for exhibition in Boston, and save us all the trouble 
of a journey to New York. The portraits are certainly of a 
very high order, and are of the most distinguished men of the 
time, — such as Cardinal Manning and the late Lord Lawrence, 
Tennyson and Browning, Carlyle and Stuart Mill, the Duke 
of Argyll and the Marquis of Salisbury, Swinburne and Burne 
Jones, not forgetting our own Motley as a young man of 


twenty-five. Watts's great portrait of Gladstone, which I had 
the good fortune to see in London, was regarded as too pre- 
cious to be exposed to the perils of an ocean voyage. I recall, 
too, his marvellous portrait of Dean Milman which is not at 
New York. But the portraits which are there are full of 
interest, both from their subjects and as works of art ; and I 
should be sorry to think that they would not find their way 
to Boston for exhibition. 

Since my return home I have received an appeal from the 
Art Committee of the Union League Club of New York, on the 
subject of the present tariff on all foreign works of art. It was 
accompanied by a petition to Congress that the duties might 
be restored to their old rate, or abolished altogether ; and I 
was requested to obtain authority for signing it in behalf of 
this Society. But while I sympathize generally in the views 
of this petition, I can hardly regard it as a matter for our 
consideration or action, and I do not propose to make it an 
exception to my rule by signing it personally. But I lay 
the papers on the table for the signatures of any members who 
may be disposed to examine or sign such a petition. 

Many months ago, there was kindly sent to me a copy of an 
article in the " New York Independent," written by our ac- 
complished Corresponding Member, Dr. Benson J. Lossing, 
on the subject of celebrating the fourth centennial of the dis- 
covery of America. The date of that discovery by Columbus 
is given by Mr. Lossing as the 12th of October, 1492. There 
are thus somewhat more than seven years to elapse before 
the fourth centennial will occur. But it seems that consulta- 
tions have already been held, both in Spain and in our own 
land, as to the mode and as to the place in which that supreme 
historical event shall be commemorated. The article of Mr. 
Lossing gives an interesting account of the views which have 
already been expressed by King Alphonso and some of his 
ministers, by the Duke of Veragua, who represents the family 
of Columbus, and by Emilio Castelar, the eminent orator and 
republican statesman of Spain. They all think that the cele- 
bration should be in Spain. Mr. Lossing, on the other hand, 
claims that New York, as "the acknowledged commercial 
metropolis of the New World," is the most appropriate place 
for a grand international celebration ; and I heartily concur 
with him. 


But a celebration at New York, however grand, is not all 
that is due to Columbus from America. His memory, with 
that of his great compeers, has been too long neglected in our 
large cities. No adequate memorial of the discoverer of the 
New World is to be found anywhere on this continent. In a 
lecture delivered before this Society on my return from Eu- 
rope, in 1869, I ventured to call attention to this omission, as 
follows : — 

" A noble monument to Columbus, recently finished, sur- 
mounted by a striking statue of him, and adorned by a series 
of bas-reliefs illustrating the strange, eventful history of his 
life, — from which, I need hardly sa} 7 , the discovery of America 
was not wholly omitted, — greeted us at the gates of Genoa, 
with the simple inscription in Italian, * To Christopher Co- 
lumbus, from his Country ; ' and as I gazed upon it with admi- 
ration, I could not help feeling that it was not there alone 
that a monument and a statue were due to his memory, but 
that upon the shores of our own hemisphere, too, there ought 
to be some worthy memorial of the discoverer of the New 

More recently, in the Centennial Oration which I delivered 
at the call of the Mayor and City Council of Boston, on the 
4th of July, 1876, I used the following language : " From 
the hour when Columbus and his compeers discovered our 
continent, its ultimate political destiny was fixed. At the 
very gateway of the Pantheon of American liberty and Ameri- 
can independence might well be seen a triple monument, — 
like that to the old inventors of printing at Frankfort, — includ- 
ing Columbus and Americus Vespucius and Cabot. They were 
the pioneers in the march to Independence. They were the 
precursors in the only progress of freedom which was to have 
no backward steps. Liberty had struggled long and bravely 
in other ages and in other lands. It had made glorious mani- 
festations of its power and promise in Athens and in Rome, 
in the mediaeval republics of Italy, on the plains of Germany, 
along the dykes of Holland, among the icy fastnesses of Swit- 
zerland, and, more securely and hopefully still, in the sea-girt 
isle of Old England. But it was the glory of those heroic old 
navigators to reveal a standing-place for it at last, where its 
lever could find a secure fulcrum and rest safely until it had 
moved the world ! " 


For the execution of such a triple monument, including the 
statues of Columbus, Americus Vespucius, and Sebastian Ca- 
bot, not one of our accomplished artists, at home or abroad, 
would find the seven intervening years too long a time. Por- 
traits of all three of the great discoverers are to be found in 
the galleries abroad, or copies of them in our own galleries. I 
believe that the original of Sebastian Cabot was destroyed by 
some accident ; but there is a careful copy of it on our own 
stairway, and another in the gallery of the Historical Society 
of New York. Copley Square would be a most eligible place 
for such a monument, if it is not previously appropriated ; and 
its surroundings, including the new Public Library and the 
Musfiiim of Art, would be in excellent keeping with it. 

I cannot but wish that the Museum of Art, with our own 
Society and the American Antiquarian Society, would take 
this memorial seriously and seasonably in hand ; and I cannot 
doubt that contributions to cover the cost could be obtained 
from time to time before the money is needed. 

But I content myself with renewing the suggestion, in the 
hope that it may attract the interest of others before it is too 

Before concluding these introductory remarks, I present to 
the Library, in behalf of Miss Mary Fraser Curtis, a pamphlet 
wdrich came to her from her grandfather, the late Hon. Daniel 
Sargent. It contains the well-remembered correspondence 
between the late John Quincy Adams and several citizens of 
Massachusetts of the old Federal part}^, of which Mr. Sargent 
was one, concerning the charge of a design to dissolve the 
Union, alleged to have existed in this State. There is a copy 
of this pamphlet in our Library already; and the contents of it 
are included, with much additional and illustrative matter, in 
the volume entitled "New England Federalism," published by 
Mr. Henry Adams in 1877. But this copy has an interest and 
a value as having the autograph signatures of all the gentlemen 
who signed the paper, — Harrison Gray Otis, Israel Thorndike, 
Thomas H. Perkins, William Prescott, Daniel Sargent, John 
Lowell, William Sullivan, Charles Jackson, Warren Dutton, 
Benjamin Pickman, Henry Cabot, son of George Cabot, Charles 
C. Parsons, son of Theophilus Parsons, and Franklin Dexter, 
son of Samuel Dexter. Thirteen more notable autograph sig- 
natures could hardly be found together anywhere, and the 



pamphlet may well find a place among the . specialties of our 

In turning over the leaves of this pamphlet, in which it had 
probably been used as a mark, I found a little remembrancer 
of a later day, — one of the votes of the old Whig party in 
1836, with the electors of President headed by Nathaniel Sils- 
bee, with Edward Everett for Governor, and with a list of no 
less than seventy-four candidates for the General Court of 
Massachusetts. My own name stands third on the list, and I 
think there are only three or four others living of the whole 
seventy-four. This old vote may well accompany the pam- 
phlet in which I found it. 

Our grateful acknowledgments will be returned to Miss 
Curtis for this gift. 

Judge Chamberlain made some observations respecting 
Samuel Maverick's palisade house of 1630, referred to in 
the Maverick Manuscript, recently discovered in the British 
Museum, and said : — 

It has been generally supposed that Samuel Maverick, as- 
sisted by David Thompson, who gave his name to an island in 
Boston Bay, some time before 1628 erected on Noddle's Island 
a house protected by palisades and fortified by guns ; and that 
it was in this house that Governor Winthrop and his party 
were entertained by Maverick when they first came to Boston 
Harbor from Salem, June 17, 1630. 

The sole authority for the erection of such a house on Nod- 
dle's Island, and for its existence when Winthrop arrived, is 
Edward Johnson, in Chap. XVII. of his " Wonder- Working 
Providence." There being nothing improbable in his account, 
it has been followed without question by Prince, Hutchinson, 
Savage, Young, Drake, Frothingham, and many others. But 
there are facts which seem to be inconsistent with Johnson's 
statement, though no one of them, nor perhaps all of them 
combined, is sufficient to overthrow it. Lately, however, 
additional evidence has come to light, and I now propose to 
state the whole case. Johnson's narrative is as follows : — 

"But to go on with the story, the 12 of July or thereabout 1630, the 
soldiers of Christ first set foot on this Western end of the World ; where 
arriving in safety, both men, women and children. On the North side 


of the Charles River, they landed near a small island, called Noddel's 
Island, where one Mr. Samuel Maverick then living, a man of a very 
loving and curteous behavior, very ready to entertain strangers, yet an 
enemy to the Reformation in hand, being strong for the lordly prelatical 
power, on this island, he had built a small Fort with the help of one 
Mr. David Thompson, placing therein four Murtherers to protect him 
from the Indians. About one mile distant upon the River ran a small 
creek, taking its name from Major Gen. Edward Gibbons, who dwelt 
there for some years after. On the South side of the River on a point 
of land called Blackstone's point, planted Mr. William Blackstone, of 
whom we have formerly spoken. To the southeast of him, near an 
island called Thompson's Island lived some few planters more. These 
persons were the first planters of those parts, having some small trading 
with the Indians for beaver skins, which moved them to make their 
abode in those parts whom these first troops of Christ's army found as 
fit helps to further their work." 

This account of the coming of Winthrop's fleet, and of the 
topography of Boston and its vicinit}^ as well as of the persons 
he found there, is so incomplete and inaccurate that it raises 
at once a question as to the authority of Johnson's book on 
matters apart from his chief purpose, — the history of the 
planting of churches in New England, — or only incidental 
thereto. It was written between 1647 and 1651, and pub- 
lished in London in 1654. Savage's opinion of it as authority 
may be gathered from his notes to Winthrop's Journal, vol. i. 
pp. 8, 100, 112. I have looked through its pages, though not 
exhaustively, and have noticed some errors not creditable to a 
historian who came in 1630, and was engaged in public affairs 
during his subsequent life. In Chap. VII. he misdescribes the 
bounds of the colony, and the reservation of mines to the king. 
In Chap. XVII. he errs by a month as to the date of Win- 
throp's arrival, and in Chap. XXV. by more than a year as to 
the death of Sagamore John and his people by small-pox. In 
Chap. XVII. he tells us that the first court was held on board 
the " Arbella," which possibly may have been, though Savage 
doubts it; and that Winthrop and others were chosen officers 
for the remainder of the year 1630, — a fact nowhere else men- 
tioned, and contradicted negatively by the absence of any such 
statement in the place of all others where it would be looked 
for, the official records of the transactions of that court. In 
the same chapter he asserts that in 1630 about one hundred 


and ten persons were admitted freemen. The record says that 
in October of that year about the same number expressed a 
desire to be so admitted, but that their request was not granted 
until May of the next year. 

If Johnson were our sole authority respecting the voyage of 
Winthrop's fleet, his reader could confidently assert that after 
leaving Yarmouth in the Isle of Wight it came directly into 
Boston Harbor, and the company first landed about July 12, 
instead of disembarking at Salem on the 12th of June. 

And if we attempt to construct the topography of Boston 
and its vicinity according to Johnson's description of it, we 
have one river, the Charles, instead of two, the other being the 
Mystic ; and into the Charles runs Gibbons's Creek, on which 
he resided many years. On the south side of the river, and 
opposite to Gibbons's plantation, we should look for Black- 
stone's Point in Boston. The utter confusion of Johnson's 
topography is apparent when we place Gibbons where he ac- 
tually resided, up Mystic River, in the " Charlestown Fields," 
now Everett, and where his creek runs to this day. 1 John- 
son's account, quoted above, was written more than fifteen 
years after the time to which it relates ; and its untrustwor- 
thiness is more clearly manifest when compared with Dudley's 
narrative covering the same period, addressed to the Coun- 
tess of Lincoln ; and its misleading character appears by ob- 
serving that even the careful and accurate Young, following 
Johnson, makes Gibbons's Creek tributary to the Charles. 2 

In like manner he gives us an incomplete account of the 
old planters. He names Maverick, Gibbons, Blackstone, and 
Thompson, but says nothing of those found at Winnisimmet as 
early as 1626, nor of Walford and his palisadoed house at 
Charlestown, nor of the Spragues and the remnant of the 
hundred planters who, Higginson says, were there in 1629. 3 

A writer of this description can hardly be deemed an au- 
thority on any controverted point ; and yet he is the sole 
authority, so far as I have observed, that places any residence 
whatsoever on Noddle's Island before 1635. 

I now bring together those facts which lead me to believe 

1 Memorial History of Boston, vol. ii. p. 387 ; Third Report of the Record 
Commissioners, passi)n; Frothingham's History of Charlestown, pp.. 59, 80. 

2 Chronicles of Massachusetts, pp. 312,384 note. 

3 Frothingham's History of Charlestown, pp. 18, 19. 


that Samuel Maverick's fortified house was at Winnisimmet, 
and not at Noddle's Island, as is asserted by Johnson ; and 
that it was at Winnisimmet he entertained Winthrop and his 
party, June 17, on his first visit to Boston Bay. 

In the first place, Samuel Maverick and John Blackleach, 
joint-owners of that part of Winnisimmet which does not now 
belong to the United States, sold the same to Richard Bel- 
lingham, Feb. 27, 1635, as appears from " Suffolk Deeds," 
lib. i. fol. 15, the fuller bounds of which will be found in the 
" Second Report of the Record Commissioners," p. 57. That 
part now owned by the United States Maverick seems to 
have owned exclusively, as some years later he sold a portion 
of it to William Stitson. And inasmuch as there is no evi- 
dence of any conveyance or allotment of that plantation to 
them or to any other party, the presumption is that before the 
coming of Winthrop they had acquired a title to it, which was 
respected by the new government. 

In the second place, Samuel Maverick had a house at Win- 
nisimmet as early as Aug. 16, 1631, a little more than a } T ear 
after he entertained Winthrop. This is clear from the fol- 
lowing record : — 

"August 16, 1631. It is ordered, that Mr. Shepheard and Robert 
Coles shall be fined five marks apiece, and Edward Gibbons twenty shil- 
lings for abusing themselves disorderly with drinking too much strong 
drink aboard the Friendship, and at Mr. Maverick his house at Winni- 
simmet." 1 

He was living there in December, 1633. 

"John Sagamore died of the small pox, and almost all his people; 
above thirty buried by Mr. Maverick of Winnisimmet in one day, . . . 
Among others, Mr. Maverick of Winnisimmet is worthy of perpetual 
remembrance. Himself, his wife and servants, went daily to them, 
ministered to their necessities, and buried their dead, and took away 
many of their children." 2 

Who was " Mr. Maverick of Winnisimmet " ? Besides the 
Rev. John Maverick, of Dorchester, there were three men of the 
name of Maverick, — Samuel, Elias, and Moses, who were ad- 
mitted freemen, respectively, in 1632, 1633, and 1634. Samuel 

1 Mass. Col. Kec, vol. i. p. 90. 

2 Savage's Winthrop's Journal, vol. i. pp. 142, 143. 



and Elias, it is almost certain, were brothers ; and both lived at 
Winnisimmet, and on the same estate, — now the property of 
the United States. But there was only one "Mr. Maverick," 
and he was Mr. Samuel Maverick. In saying this, I exclude 
the Rev. Mr. John Maverick, of Dorchester. 

Uniformly and without exception, both in the Colony Rec- 
ords and in Winthrop's Journal, Samuel Maverick is called 
"Mr. Maverick ; " nor is Elias or Moses ever so called until 
a much later period. At that time " Mr." was not only a mark 
of rank, but of seniority as well ; it was an absolute, as well 
as a relative term. 

There being, therefore, only one " Mr. Maverick," let us 
assume for a moment that he lived on Noddle's Island instead 
of at Winnisimmet, and then consider the likelihood of " him- 
self, his wife and his servants going daily " in a skiff over the 
half-frozen bay between Noddle's Island and Winnisimmet in 
December weather to minister to the dying Indians. 

We are absolutely certain that there was a house at Winni- 
simmet in 1631 ; and there are some reasons which indicate 
that neither at that time nor for some time after was there 
any residence at Noddle's Island. If Maverick had a fortified 
house at Noddle's Island in 1630, as Johnson asserts, it must 
have been well known to all people, certainly to Winthrop 
and the members of his family ; and yet within six months 
after Maverick is thought to have entertained the Governor 
there, " three of his servants coming in a shallop from Mistic, 
— Dec. 24, 1630, — were driven upon Noddle's Island, and 
forced to stay there all that night, without fire or food." 1 
The reader is ready to ask why they did not seek shelter and 
food in the hospitable house of Samuel Maverick. 

If Maverick before 1630 had built a house on Noddle's 
Island, under a claim of right, and was living there in April, 
1632, the order of the General Court of that date is at least 
singular. Why should he be excluded, on his own estate, 
from " shooting at fowls," or from taking them with nets, and 
the exclusive privilege of those acts be given to one John 
Perkins ? 2 

As we have seen, Maverick had a house at Winnisimmet as 
early as August, 1631. In the previous October, within four 

1 Winthrop's Journal, vol. 1. p. 47. 

2 Mass. Col. Rec, vol. i. p. 95. 


months after Winthrop's visit, he, Dudley, and Maverick sent 
out a pinnace to Narragansett for corn for the colonists; and 
the next year they went as far as Virginia on the same busi- 
ness ; and on the return of the bark, " she came to Winyse- 
mett." * Why should she go to Winnisimmet instead of 
Noddle's Island, if Maverick's residence was there? 

It is significant that though Wood's map, made not later 
than 1634, and the newly discovered Winthrop map of about 
the same date, both indicate a settlement at Winnisimmet, 
neither of them affords the slightest indication of any resi- 
dence on Noddle's Island, which on the latter is represented as 
covered by forests. Nor does Wood, in his text, say more of 
Noddle's Island than to class it with Long, Round, Slate, 
Glass, and Bird Islands, which abound with woods, water, and 
meadow ground where the inhabitants pasture their cattle : 
but he states " that the last town in the still bay is Winnisim- 
met, a very sweet place for situation, and stands very com- 
modiously, being fit to entertaine more planters than are yet 
seated." 2 

I have said that aside from Johnson there is absolutely no au- 
thority for saying that Maverick, or any one else, had a house 
on Noddle's Island in 1630. There are reasons for conjecture 
that such was the case until some time in 1634. Maverick 
sold part of his Winnisimmet estate to Bellingham in 1635, but 
he still had one hundred and fifteen acres left, now the United 
States Hospital grounds; and, as I conjecture, and as Wood's 
plan seems to indicate, his house was on that part. He ac- 
quired title to Noddle's Island in April, 1633, but, as we have 
seen, was at Winnisimmet as late as December of that year. 
He may have built on Noddle's Island in 1634. That is 
probable from the following facts : In July, 1637, Sir Harry 
Vane and Lord Ley dined with Maverick at Noddle's Island. 
He doubtless had a house there at that date. From May, 
1635, to May, 1636, he was in Virginia ; and that his house 
was built before he took that journey may be inferred from 
the fact that his wife, writing to Trelawny, dated her letter 
from " Nottell's Hand in Massachusetts Bay, the 20th Novem- 
ber, 1635." Unless he built in the winter before going to Vir- 
ginia, we are thrown back into the year 1634. And that it 

1 Winthrop's Journal, vol. i. p. 86 : Dudley to the Countess of Lincoln. 

2 New England's Prospect, Prince Soc. ed., p. 44. 



was not built earlier than that date is probable from the cir- 
cumstance, already stated, that he was living at Winnisimmet 
in December, 1633. 

But it is scarcely worth while to pursue the question further, 
when we have evidence which is clear and conclusive. The 
following extract from the newly found Maverick Manuscript 2 
settles the question : — 

" Winnisime. — Two miles Sowth from Rumney Marsh on the North 
side of Mistick River is Winnisime which though but a few houses on it, 
yet deserves to be mencond. One house yet standing there which is 
the Antientest house in the Massachusetts Goverment. a house which in 
the yeare 1625 I fortified with a Pillizado and fflankers and gunnes both 
belowe and above in them which awed the Indians who at that time had 
a mind to Cutt off the English, They once faced it but receiveing a repulse 
never attempted it more although (as now they confesse) they repented 
it when about 2 yeares afcer they saw so many English come over." 

There is no ambiguity in the above statement. The house 
was fortified in 1625. Was it built then, or in 1623, when 
Thompson may have been in the Bay? If Maverick's state- 
ment, made May 30, 1669, that " it is forty-five years since I 
came into New England," is to be taken strictly, he was not in 
the country before May 30, 1624 ; but neither this nor his 
other assertion, that " I have been here from the very first set- 
tling of New England by the English," 2 should be construed 
with literal exactness. Nor do I think we are to understand 
him as saying that temporary structures, such as must have 
sheltered the settlers at Wessagusset, were not erected before 
his palisade house at Winnisimmet. On the principal fact — 
that not later than 1625 he erected at Winnisimmet the first 
permanent house in the Bay Colony, and that the same was 
standing as late as 1660 — I think we may safely rest. Mav- 
erick could not have been mistaken in respect to anything so 
important in his personal history, nor had he any reason for 
misstating it. He certainly knew the facts of his own life bet- 
ter than Johnson, on whose sole authority all opposing state- 
ments are based. And Johnson's statement in regard to this 
matter, as well as to many other matters which may be sup- 
posed to have fallen under his observation, is coupled with 

i Ante, p. 236. 

2 Mass. Hist. Coll. vol. xxxvii. pp. 317, 318. 


assertions which we know to be untrustworthy. The historian 
of East Boston has discussed the question, Who was Mr. Mav- 
erick, of Winnisimmet ? with considerable ingenuity ; but the 
authority for his main assumption had not then been discredited 
by the Maverick Manuscript, nor does his discussion include 
the facts essential to the determination of the question. 

Dr. Ellis alluded to the recent death of the Rev. Dr. 
Blagden, who, having moved to New York, had been trans- 
ferred from the roll of Resident Members to the Corresponding 

Dr. Peabody spoke warmly of the character of Dr. Blagden, 
having known him intimately for more than twenty years. At 
one time he was regarded as second to no one of his denomina- 
tion in this region as a preacher. He was distinguished for 
soundness of thought, maturity of mind and judgment, and a 
comprehensive charity which was as large as the Church of 
Christ. There was wanting in him the sensational element 
which now is almost essential for a popular preacher. His 
professional services were prized ; and some of his utterances, 
particularly in eulogy of those who had a kindred spirit to his 
own, were eloquent. He has left no memories but those of 
reverence and affection. 

Dr. Paige followed in a similar strain, saying that for forty 
years they had both been members of this Society, and that he 
had always regarded Dr. Blagden as one of his special friends, 
and sincerely regretted his removal to New York. 

A new serial, including the Proceedings for October and 
November, was laid on the table by the Secretary at this 



The regular meeting was held on Thursday, the 12th in- 
stant ; and in the absence of the President, it was called to 
order by Dr. Ellis. 

The record of the last meeting, read by the Secretary, was 

The accessions b} r gift to the Library during the past month 
were reported by the Librarian. 

The Corresponding Secretary read a letter from Mr. Deane, 
who was unable to be present, in which he announced that 
a new volume of Trumbull Papers was now ready for distri- 
bution, and also that he had prepared memoirs of the late 
Richard Frothingham and the late Samuel F. Haven. 

Dr. Ellis then spoke of the Rev. William Barry, D.D., 
recently deceased, who was a Corresponding Member, and 
the founder of the Chicago Historical Society. 

Mr. C. C. Smith moved that the thanks of the Society be 
presented to the Committee for Publishing the Trumbull 
Papers, and that they be requested to consider the expe- 
diency of preparing a second volume. The motion was 

Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes presented, in the name of 
his daughter, Mrs. Turner Sargent, Bellin's ''Maritime Atlas 
of Maps and Plans," in five volumes, the first of which relates 
to North America and the West India Islands ; the " Military 
History of Prince Eugene and the Duke of Marlborough," in 
two folio volumes; and Napier's "Peninsular War," in five 
volumes. The thanks of the Society were voted for this gift. 

Dr. Ellis read a note from Mr. Samuel H. Russell, en- 
closing from Captain Nathaniel Spooner, of Boston, the fol- 
lowing letter, written by his grandfather, describing the naval 
battle between the " Chesapeake " and the " Shannon " on 
June 1, 1813: — 

Boston June 2nd 1813. 

Son Nath l , — This is to give you information of the capture of the 
U. States Frigate Chesepeak. Circumstances respecting it [were] as fol- 
lows 3 viz, Yesterday morning a British Friggatt Supposed the Shannon 


was seen off about 4 leagues to the North' 1 & East d of the Light; at 
12 mei'd 11 the Chesp k was under way with a pleasant breeze from the 
west d . I happened to discover this from the State house and as I had 
a desire to see something of the transaction, & accordingly I proceded 
down to India Street wharf, where we arrived in time to get on board a 
packett Sloop, which was just going off, on board of which were about 
oO persons, & Tilley the Pilot commanded. We passed down the 
harbour and went out near Point Shirly or pudding point. When off 
the Graves the Chesp k was abreast of us about a mile distant, the B. 
Frig 1 about 5 leagues to the North* & East d . The Chesp k sat all Sails 
except lower Steering Sails ; the B. Frig* was running to the East & 
South d with Top G. sails &c. We followed with all dispatch, our Sloop 
sailing very well. At 4 P. m. the B. Frig 1 was about 5 Leagues from 
us and the Chesp k after her, about 2 Leagues. We then expected the 
B. Frig 1 would not be brought to action, but the Chesp k fired a gun 
and hoisted a white flagg at her M. Top Gait. Royal Mast head with the 
motto, Free Trade fy Sailors rights [and] the American Ensign at her 
Mizen Peake. About 15 minutes after this the B. Frig* lay her main 
and mizen Topsail to the mast waiting for the Chesepeake who stood 
directly for her. At 6 P. m. the Action commenced, the wind being from 
the South d , and a good leading Breeze. The Chesp k was to the Wind- 
ward & a heavy fire commenced which continued about 10 or 12 min- 
utes and, as far as we could discover, the Ships were sometimes connecting, 
after which the firing of Cannon ceas d and the Friggatts fell from each 
other some little distance, and lay with their Main & Mizen Top- 
sails to the mast with their coulours flying as usual. They continued in 
this Situation about 20 minutes, during which time we expected they 
were preparing to recommence the cannonading, but to our Surprise we 
saw the white flag of the Chesepeake & the Amer 11 colours from the 
Mizen Peak hauled down, & an English Ensign hoisted at the Mizen 
Peak with the American under it ; this was about 40 minutes after Six 
and we were then about 5 miles from them. At 20 minutes after 7, 
after a number of Boats had paf d from Ship to Ship, they both Squaird 
their after yards and stood to the East d . We then wore ship, & stood 
for Boston light, being then distant from it about 12 or 14 Leagues, 
Cape Ann Bearing as was judg d , about N. W. by W. Thus you have 
the particulars of what I believe has been a very severe action and 
remarkably short; for the time of the firing of the first Shott untill they 
both bore away as I presume for Ballifax, was one hour and 20 min- 
utes, being 20 minutes past 1 P. M. 

Many are the oppinions of People here respecting the manner in 
which this action was conducted. My own oppinion is, that imme- 
diately after the first Broadside the Chesepeake boarded the B. Frig 1 ; 
that the B. F. was too powerfull for her, and put a number of men 


on b d the Chesp k , when they fought Close quarters untill the Flagg 
was shifted, as before described, which was 20 miuutes. The reason 
for my oppinion is this, that they would have recommenced their can- 
nonade or the Colours of the Chesepeak would have been shifted, nei- 
ther of which did occur for 20 minutes, the Ships lying with their 
Top sl & main ... to the mast a small distance from each other, the 
Chesepeake being to windward, nor was there any more Cannon fired. 
If my conjecture was right it must have been a most Sanguinary 
Scene and no doubt many very valuable lives lost. I had a good op- 
portunity to observe them as we had a good Spy Glass on b d and the 
weather was very fine. The Chesp k nor the British F. did not ap- 
pear to be injured in either their spars or riggen except the flying Jibb 
Boom of the B. F. which was broken. 

We returned this day at 12 Merd n , having had no sleep since night 
before last. Of course I hope to rest well this night. 

John is very well and I hope will like his plans. My love to all, 
your mama in particular. Shall write you again soon. 

Am yr. aff. father 

N. Spooner. 
Cap tn Nathl Spooner Jr. 

Admiral Preble pointed out, on a Coast Survey chart of 
Massachusetts Bay, where the battle was fought, and then 
continued as follows : — 

Mr. Spooner's letter, written the day after the battle between 
the "Chesapeake" and the " Shannon," is valuable as the account 
of an outside observer, only five miles distant, describing what 
he saw, and confirming much that is narrated in the official 
reports and by those who were actors in the battle, particu- 
larly in respect to the position where the battle was fought ; 
a very general and erroneous opinion having grown up that 
the battle was fought off Marblehead or within sight of Bos- 
ton, and that it was seen from Boston. One gentleman — I 
will not call him old, for no one is, or wishes to be, old until 
he dies — has assured me that as a schoolboy he saw the fight 
from Milton Hills, and that it took place inside of Boston Light. 
I asked him if he would not believe the statements of those 
who shared in the action. He said no ; he preferred his eye- 
sight to their statements, which, however, he would no longer 
contend against. The probability is that he saw the gun of 
defiance or notice which the " Chesapeake " fired soon after 


she got under way ; as lie said to me, the battle was fought 
soon after noon. 

An old salt still living in Boston, Benjamin Trefethen, then 
a young man of twenty-three years, who was on board the 
" Chesapeake " and stationed at a gun on the spar deck, says, 
in a printed broadside, dated Boston, Oct. 22, 1881 : " When 
in the offing near Marblehead, between two and three o'clock 
P. M., as near as I can recollect, the action commenced, . . . 
and the engagement lasted not more than three quarters of an 
hour." This only shows how unreliable are the recollections 
of a sailor participant sixty-eight years after, and how valu- 
able become the records and impressions put down while 
everything is fresh and vivid in the memory. 

Now, the facts are these, as to the time, period, and place 
of the engagement : Sailing-Master Knox, who piloted the 
" Chesapeake " out of Boston Harbor, reported the next day 
to the Commandant of the Boston Navy Yard, and said " that 
he left her at 5 P. M., Boston Light bearing about west six 
leagues " (eighteen nautical miles). Plotting this course and 
distance on a Coast Survey chart of the Bay, I find she was 
then about the same distance from Marblehead, and directly 
abreast of, and about thirteen miles distant from, Scituate 
Harbor, the nearest land. Mr. Knox further states that the 
action commenced about 6 P. M., within about eleven leagues, 
or thirty-three nautical miles, from the Boston Light. Mr. 
Spooner's letter confirms this statement, except that he esti- 
mates the distance at from twelve to fourteen leagues, or from 
thirty-six to forty-two nautical miles. An express from Wey- 
mouth to Mr. Russell of the " Columbian Centinel" states that 
" at 50 minutes past 5 P. M. the Chesapeake closed with a 
British Frigate, and that they were warm at it enveloped in 
fire and smoke 15 min. past 6 P. M." Lieutenant Budd in his 
official report states that " the action commenced J before six 
within pistol shot." Captain Broke in his official report says, 
" At half past five the enemy hauled up within hail of us." 
Another account, published in the " Centinel " the day after 
the fight, says, " The Shannon stood to the S d and E d and 
continued on that course until she disappeared from sight in 
town about 4 o'clock. The Chesapeake also disappeared about 
J past five still standing to the Eastward," — showing that the 
engagement could not be seen from Boston. 


Still another Boston paper, of Jane 4, says : " Spectators 
were collected on every place in Boston which commanded a 
view of the sea, but the frigates proceeded to the Eastward 
until lost to sight from the town, and our citizens on shore 
were thereby spared the distress of witnessing the result, a 
pain which those had to encounter who were spectators of the 
conflict in boats and vessels." Then follows an account of the 
action derived from these spectators, which it is unnecessary 
to repeat here. Thus the place of the action and the time of 
the engagement, allowing for a difference in watches, are pretty 
well defined. After the action, about sundown, the killed 
were committed to what Paul Jones, after a similar fight, 
designated as k< a spacious grave," and both vessels proceeded 
to Halifax. 

Captain Lawrence has been censured for going out with his 
young and inexperienced officers and newly collected crew to 
meet the " Shannon," but as a brave man and officer I do not 
see how he could have done otherwise. He was under orders 
to sail immediately ; and the presence of an enemy of equal 
force should not, as it did not, prevent his sailing to meet her. 
Had he delayed going out, he would have been censured by 
the Navy Department and the people, and would probably 
have been relieved of his command. It has also been stated 
that Lawrence " got up from the dinner-table flushed with 
wine, and rushed. out to this encounter," when nothing could 
be more untrue. His ship was unmoored and prepared for 
sea at 8 A. M., and at meridian was got under way, and pro- 
ceeded to sea to meet the " Shannon," — ■ rather early for an 
after-dinner hour. 

People anxious to find some reason for the unexpected cap- 
ture of our ship, which so many went out in boats to see 
victorious, invented all sorts of causes. Lawrence's mistake 
seems to have been, under the circumstances, in engaging his 
enemy to windward, according to the rule which was laid 
down by the writers on naval tactics at that time, and which 
in a previous action had resulted in his victory in the u Hor- 
net " over the " Peacock " in the same brief space of time as 
the "Chesapeake" was captured. Captain Broke thought the 
" Chesapeake " would pass under the " Shannon's " stern, and 
engage her upon the port or lee side, and therefore directed his 
men to lie down flat as she passed, to avoid in some degree 


her raking fire. Had Captain Lawrence done so, the fate of 
the action might have been different. Sir Howard Douglas, a 
good authority, says : " This is an obvious advantage, which, 
as Sir P. Broke admits, the l Chesapeake ' might have availed 
of; and it is one which, had it been taken, would most prob- 
ably have gained some previous advantage." In consequence 
of engaging to windward, the " Shannon's " sails were be- 
calmed, and the " Chesapeake " shot ahead, and was raked 
by, instead of raking, her opponent; and the "Shannon's" 
first broadside and the "•Chesapeake's" subsequent falling on 
board of the " Shannon" enabled her to be boarded, when, 
every officer on deck being either killed or wounded, her fate 
was decided. 

Communications from the Third Section having been called 
for, Mr. R. C. Winthrop, Jr., presented an unpublished let- 
ter of Chief Justice Sewall, and nineteen letters of Katha- 
rine, widow of Wait Winthrop, a lady who lies buried just 
beneath the Society's windows, and who figures prominently 
in Sewall's Diary as one of the numerous objects of his unsuc- 
cessful attachment. In this connection Mr. Winthrop alluded 
to the recently printed and very interesting Address on the 
Life and Character of Chief Justice Sewall, delivered by 
Dr. George E. Ellis at the Old South Church on the 26th 
of October last, certain passages of which, he maintained, 
did injustice to the above-named lady, and were inconsistent 
with Sewall's own account of her. Mr. Winthrop paid a 
warm tribute to her pious and unselfish nature, and pro- 
tested against any contrary impressions of it which might be 
wrung from the peevish chatter of a discarded septuagenarian 

Mr. Quincy read several verses of a song written for the 
supper of the Freshman Class of Harvard College at the 
close of the college year 1818, by Ralph Waldo Emerson, 
prefacing them with some remarks and reminiscences of his 

Mr. A. A. Lawrence presented some original manuscripts 
in reference to John Brown, mostly written by G. W. Brown, 
who established the first printing press in Kansas; Charles 
Robinson, the first Governor elected by the people ; Colonel 
Blood and Captain Walker, who had lived in the State thirty 


years. These persons were fully cognizant of all the facts 
relating to the settlement of Kansas, and they suffered in 
their persons and property. They have written independently, 
and their statements will be hereafter of great value to the 

Mr. Slafter communicated a memoir of the late Charles 
W. Tuttle. 






The subject of this notice was born in Charlestown, Massachu- 
setts, Jan. 31, 1812. His father and his grandfather each bore 
the name of Richard. The latter served as an officer through 
the Revolutionary War. His mother was Mary Thompson, 
daughter of Timothy Thompson, and sister of the late Dr. 
Abraham Rand Thompson and the Hon. Benjamin Thompson, 
all of Charlestown. The record of the Frothingham family 
in Charlestown is of the highest respectability, from the time 
when William, the common ancestor, who probably came over 
in 1630 in the fleet with Governor Winthrop, settled there. 

The house in which Richard Frothingham was born and 
spent the period of his boyhood was in Eden Street, on land 
originally granted to William Frothingham, the first emigrant, 
who died in 1651, and in whose family it remained until it 
was purchased in 1867 by the Winchester Home for Aged 
Women. He first attended a school kept by Polly Frothing- 
ham in Main Street. He then went to the public school on 
the Neck ; and, lastly, he attended Master Andrews's Academy 
in Cordis Street. He early developed a taste for reading, and 
began to collect books. From money earned by writing for a 
Mr. Doane in his Brush Factory, he bought an encyclopaedia. 
At eighteen years of age he was clerk with a merchant on 
Long Wharf, in Boston, and in January, 1833, he entered the 
employ of John Doggett & Co., the well-known dealers in car- 
pets and furniture, in Cornhill. In April, 1834, at the ear- 
nest wish of the late Caleb Eddy, he entered the office of the 
Middlesex Canal Company, where he remained many years as 


clerk, agent, and treasurer, and until the affairs of that cor- 
poration were closed up, — about the year 1860. In 1852 he 
became one of the proprietors and the managing editor of the 
" Boston Post," having for many years previously written for 
its columns ; and here for thirteen years he did faithful service 
as the principal contributor to that journal, when, in 18G5, his 
connection with it ceased. After that time he was employed 
in attending to his private and public trusts and to literary 
pursuits. He had an active and busy life, and was far more 
devoted to public duties than to mere personal affairs ; but he 
neglected nothing. 

He had a warm attachment to his native town, and was fond 
of studying its history and of promoting its interests. He 
early became a member of the School Committee ; and from 
1838 to 1843, inclusive, he was one of the Trustees of the Free 
Schools, and during the greater part of the time President of 
the Board, and in that capacity signed their reports ; and 
while at a later period he was Mayor of the city he was ex~ 
officio Chairman of this Board. In 1840 he was chosen one of 
a Committee on Finance, whose duty it was to audit the ac- 
counts of the Town Treasurer, of the Overseers of the Poor, 
and of the Board of Health ; and for several years he con- 
tinued to be rechosen a member of the same committee, with 
similar duties. He was influential in establishing the Young 
Men's Charitable Association, and was connected with the 
Charlestown Debating Society, the Charlestown Union Li- 
brary, and also the News Room, no one of which is now in 

For five years from 1840 to 1851, inclusive, he was a repre- 
sentative to the State Legislature, and in 1853 a member of 
the Massachusetts Constitutional Convention, and was Mayor 
of the city for three years, from 1851 to 1853. He delivered 
the address at the dedication of the new City Hall, June 17, 
1869 ; and also the oration at the inauguration of the Soldiers' 
and Sailors' Monument, June 17, 1872, having served on the 
committee which had full charge of its design and erection. 
Of the Warren Institution for Savings he was for many years 
a Trustee, as also of the Public Library ever since its estab- 
lishment in 1861 ; and after the annexation of the city to 
Boston he was a member of the Boston Library Board until 
1879. On June 30, 1876, " Frothingham School and District" 


was named in his honor. His connection with many literary, 
charitable, and other public institutions made him ever an 
honored guest or a welcome speaker at all civic or military 
gatherings, whether for business or pleasure. 

In his political opinions he was a Democrat, — that is, he be- 
longed to the party which bore that name, — and he did faith- 
ful work as a party man. He was a delegate to the National 
Democratic Conventions in 1852 and 1876, and was the nom- 
inee several times in his district for Congwess. He served 
several times as a member of committees, was a delegate to 
local and State conventions, where he often presided, and was 
often a speaker at political meetings. 

In his religious belief he was a Universalist, and conspicuous 
as a layman in that denomination. He was often a delegate to 
its conventions, was heartily interested in its schools and col- 
leges, and was one of the trustees of Tufts College from its 
incorporation in 1852, and for eight years its Treasurer. His 
father was one of the original members of the Universalist 
Society in Charlestown, whose church was dedicated in 1811 ; 
and the son, in after years, was Superintendent of its Sunday 
school. In 1836 he was elected Clerk of the society, and served 
as such for several years. In 1840 he was a member of the 
Standing Committee, which office he held, with the exception 
of five years, till his death, serving almost continually as its 
chairman. In an address made at the annual meeting of the 
society in March, 1880, soon after Mr. Frothingham's death, 
the Hon. T. T. Sawyer paid the following tribute to his 
associate : — 

" Thirty-eight years of service — three as Clerk and thirty-five as a mem- 
ber of the Standing Committee, most of the time as chairman — bears its 
own witness to his faithfulness and the estimation in which he was held 
by his associates. No religious organization ever had a more devoted 
and unselfish officer or member, — on all occasions ready with his coun- 
sel, his time, his means, and his hearty interest. Our records are filled 
with the evidence of what I say, and our memories are crowded with 
occasions made successful and happy by his presence. The enjoyment, 
the comfort, the interest of all alone occupied his thought; and Christian 
charity, that greatest of all good things, was never absent from his mind 
or his soul. Such was the man with whom we have all been associated." 

But Mr. Frothingham's services were not confined to his 
native town, to his political party, or to his religious denomi- 


nation. He served on various State and city committees ; he 
was a member of the State Board of Health, and was from 
1875 President of the Bunker Hill Monument Association. 
Elected in 1846 a member of the Massachusetts Historical 
Society, he was for thirty years its Treasurer. He was a 
member of the American Antiquarian Society, of the New 
England Historic-Genealogical Society, and corresponding 
member of several historical societies in other States, and an 
honorary membe# of the Phi Beta Kappa Society of Harvard 
College. He was twice called to deliver Fourth-of-July 
orations, — once in Newburyport in 1851, and in Boston in 
1874. The honorary degree of A.M. was conferred upon 
him by Harvard College in 1858, and that of LL.D. by Tufts 
College in 1874. 1 

In this summary of Mr. Frothingham's busy life but slight 
mention has been made of his labors in the department of let- 
ters, more especially in that of history. His early love of 
books has been mentioned, and his fondness for what related 
to the annals of his native town. He collected a large mass 
of material, both in print and manuscript, for future use, and 
was known as being most liberal in imparting his. unused stores 
to others who were writing on themes kindred to his own; He 
thus early laid a foundation for a noble library of monographs 
and local maps, as well as works of general history, to which 
he made additions from time to time, as increasing means and 
opportunities enabled him to do. He was ambitious of being 
a writer ; and in order to discipline his mind for exactness in 
investigation and statement, he early began to keep a journal 
for the record of historical events, which he arranged in a 
tabulated form. He began to write for the newspapers, and 
thus by the diligent employment of his spare time was pre- 
paring the way for that usefulness and distinction as a writer 
which he afterward attained. 

In 1845 he issued the first number of his " History of Charles- 
town," on the cover of which he says that a few years ago 
he prepared a series of communications upon the History of 
Charlestown, intending them for the '* Bunker Hill Aurora," 

1 For the greater part of the facts relating to Mr. Frothingham's early life in 
Charlestown, and of the dates connected with his public career, I am indebted to 
his son, Mr. Thomas Goddard Frothingham ; and I have not hesitated to use 
often his own language in embodying his memoranda in this sketch. 


but that the advice of friends induced him to keep them and 
add to them until they might appear in the more preten- 
tious form of a volume. Nos. 2 and 3 followed in 184G ; 
Nos. 4, 5, and 6, in 1847 ; and No. 7, in 1849. All these 
comprised three hundred and sixty-eight pages, bringing the 
History down to the Battle of Bunker Hill, an account of 
which is included in the last number. Mr. Frothingham evi- 
dently intended to bring the annals down to a later period, 
for the book was never issued as a completed work. The 
attractive subject of the Siege of Boston, to which he had 
now arrived in his History, grew to larger proportions on his 
hands ; and before the close of the year 1849 it was issued as a 
volume by itself. 

" The History of Charlestown" is one of our best town his- 
tories. Unfortunately, it did not receive the finishing touch 
of the author, and it contains no index. Since his death the 
publishers of the book have printed a titlepage and a table of 
contents, of which the owners can avail themselves if they 
wish, in binding their numbers. 

" The History of the Siege of Boston," published in 1849, is, 
as I have already said in another place, 1 " a monograph so com- 
plete, so thorough in everything relating to the theme and its 
kindred incidents, that it threw almost all else written on this 
subject into the shade, as an exhaustive history of the Lexing- 
ton and Concord affair, the Battle of Bunker Hill, and the 
Siege of Boston." Mr. Ticknor sent a copy of the book to 
Lord Mahon, who received it too late to be used by him in his 
History, but who spoke of it as showing " industry and merit." 
Mr. Bancroft, in a letter now before me, dated New York, 
Jan. 17, 1850, writes : — 

" I received some days ago your History of the Siege of Boston, 
and I delayed acknowledging it purposely, that I might first examine it. 
Had I been less certain of instruction, I should have thanked you at 
once. I am now able to say to you that in my judgment your book 
excels any that has appeared on insulated parts of our history. It is 
the best of our historic monographs that I have seen. You have been 
patient in research and very successful ; you have been most impartial ; 
you have brought to excellent materials a sound and healthy judgment ; 
and after finishing all this, your work is pervaded with a modesty which 
lends a new charm to its merit." 

1 See remarks on the death of Mr. Frothingham in the Proceedings, vol. xvii. 
p. 332. 



This volume went through several editions, and the fourth 
appeared in 1873. 

In 1865 Mr. Frothingham published his " Life and Times of 
Joseph Warren." He began this work in 1849, and his collec- 
tion of materials soon became large. A glance at the Preface 
to the book will show the sources whence his authorities were 

It was the most natural thing in the world for Mr. Frothingham 
to write the Life of Joseph Warren, for "Mr. Frothingham 
regarded Warren as the embodiment of the spirit of the Revo- 
lution. His imagination seems to have been early impressed by 
the almost romantic career of that youthful patriot, who died 
in the affair of the 17th of June, just as he had reached the age 
of thirty-four years. Warren was the central figure always 
present to his mind, as the granite shaft, erected on the spot 
where his hero fell, was always present to his sight. The Life 
of Warren is thoroughly imbued with this spirit. If I should 
criticise the book, I should say that it lacked the quiet dignity 
and repose which should characterize the historical narrative ; 
but I should forget, in doing so, that it was Mr. Frothingham 
writing the Life of Warren. The fervor is glowing and elevated 
throughout." 2 It is an authentic history of the time in which 
his hero lived, acted, and died. 

Mr. Frothingham's last book of any extent was " The Rise of 
the Republic of the United States," published in 1872. He 
probably regarded this as his crowning work. He designed it 
as a history of the rise of local self-government throughout the 
colonies, showing that as the colonies grew in strength, the 
idea of national union was gradually developed. The germ of 
this sentiment, " the sentiment of nationality," he finds at an 
early stage in our history, and traces its growth to its final 
consummation in the Union of 1789. 

This book must have cost Mr. Frothingham great labor in 
its preparation, for his facts were often derived from the most 
obscure sources. The information here embodied concerning 
the proceedings of towns and States which preceded and au- 
thorized the important movements resulting in the Declaration 
of Independence and the formation of the United States Gov- 
ernment, is ample if not exhaustive. Mr. Winthrop has said 
of this work : 2 — 

1 Proceedings, vol. xvii p. 333. 2 Ibid., p. 330. 


"It is not, perhaps, a volume to attract the general reader; but the 
student of political history will always resort to it in tracing the gradual 
development of the idea of national union on the American Continent, 
and will find in it a collation of the utterances not only of our own 
James Otis and Joseph Warren and Samuel Adams and John Adams, 
but of the great advocates of liberty and union in all parts of the country, 
from its earliest colonial exigence." 

It may be added here that the substance of this vol- 
ume was, previous to its publication, delivered in a course 
of lectures on the Rise of the Republic before the Lowell 

In 1864 Mr. Frothingham lost a very dear friend in 'the death 
of the Rev. Thomas Starr King, in San Francisco, California ; 
and he prepared, and published in a duodecimo volume of about 
two hundred and fifty pages, a warm and beautiful tribute to 
his memory. Mr. King had formerly lived in Charlestown, and 
Mr. Frothingham had formed a close attachment to this culti- 
vated and liberal young preacher and scholar; and this tribute 
discloses the intimacy of their relations, and the close bond of 
sympathy in mind and spirit by which they were united. And 
here I may not omit to mention that Mr. Frothingham had 
equally intimate relations with another eloquent preacher and 
divine, the Rev. Dr. E. H. Chapin, who was also settled for a 
time in Charlestown. 

His services as Treasurer of the Massachusetts Historical 
Society for thirty years, in which, says Mr. Charles C. Smith, 
his successor in that office, " he exhibited the conscientious 
fidelity and accuracy which were among his distinguishing 
characteristics as an historian," 1 by no means exhausted his 
labors in its behalf. The volumes of its Collections and Pro- 
ceedings bear witness to his co-operation and aid as editor or 
contributor. The fourth volume of the fourth series, pub- 
lished in 1858, was edited by him, and contained the corre- 
spondence relating to the supplies sent to Boston during the 
unhappy period following the Boston Port Bill. In that 
volume was also published a rare manuscript — formerly 
known to exist, but for a long time lost — called Phineas 
Pratt's Narrative. Several copies of this tract were struck off 
in a separate pamphlet for distribution. Mr. Frothingham was 
also one of a committee on a centennial volume,- — the fourth 

1 Proceedings, vol. xvii. p. 335. 


volume of the fifth series, — printed by the Society in 1878, of 
which Mr. Adams, our Vice-President, was chairman. 

The Proceedings also contain several of his contributions. 
At a special meeting of the Society, held on the evening of 
the 13th of December, 1873, at the house of Mr. Waterston 
in Chester Square, to commemorate the one hundredth anni- 
versary of the Destruction of the Tea in Boston Harbor, Mr. 
Frothingham communicated a valuable paper, with many illus- 
trative documents, which was printed in the Proceedings 
under that date. 

The monthly meeting of the Society in June, 1875, was, by 
his invitation, held at his house in Charlestown. On that occa- 
sion he delivered an appropriate address, which, in an enlarged 
form, was printed in the Proceedings. It there includes the 
account of the Battle of Bunker Hill, by Judge Prescott, for 
the first time printed. Several papers were communicated by 
other members, and discussions ensued, after which, as the 
records of the Society say, " the members adjourned to the 
summit of Breed's Hill and the grounds on which the battle 
was fought, where were staked out the outlines of the redoubt 
and breastwork. The position of the rail fence at the foot 
of Bunker Hill was also pointed out to the members. After 
returning to the house, the meeting was formally dissolved, 
and the members retired to another apartment, where they 
received additional evidence of the hospitality of their host/' 

At the October meeting in 1877 he communicated for publi- 
cation, as from Mr. Bancroft, a transcript of Governor Hutch- 
inson's own account of the interesting conversation between 
himself and King George the Third, held in the ro} r al closet 
immediately on the arrival of Hutchinson in London, July 1, 
1774. This paper Mr. Frothingham had previously read to 
the Society, but at that time was enjoined from its publication, 
though it had been freely used by him in his Life of Warren. 
It was now published entire in the Proceedings. He, also, at 
this meeting communicated for publication a diary of Francis 
Newell, of Boston, " from 1773 to the end of 1774," from the 
original manuscript. 

While the first volume of the early Proceedings of the 
Society, published in 1879, was passing through the press, 
Mr. Frothingham, by request of the Committee of Publication, 
prepared for it a memoir of the Hon. Josiah Bartlett, M.D., an 


early member from Charlestown. A few copies of this paper 
were separately issued. 

For many years he was a member of the American Anti- 
quarian Society, and he took great interest in their meetings. 
On the occurrence of one or more of the semi-annual meet- 
ings held in Boston, he extended to the members the hospitality 
of his home in Monument Square, and also served as their 
guide in pointing out the objects of interest on Breed's Hill. 
At the annual meeting in October, 1870, he prepared the 
Report of the Council, in which he discussed the subject 
of Municipalities, or Town Governments in the American 

I have made but a brief reference to his labors as a journal- 
ist, or to his services in public life, as a member of the State 
Legislature, and as Mayor of Charlestown. As a journalist, 
his pen was actively employed in discussing the party politics 
of the day ; but he also wrote for the columns of his paper 
many articles of interest as historical treatises and reviews. 
Though a party man, and devoted to the advocacy of the line 
of policy pursued by the Democratic party before the War of 
the Rebellion, the morning after the news arrived that Fort 
Sumter had been fired upon by Southern rebels, he came out 
in his newspaper with a noble, patriotic leader, headed " Stand 
by the Flag," pleading that the Government and its flag be 

While a member of the State Legislature he introduced and 
carried through that body a bill which provided for security to 
holders of bank-bills, by compelling banks to make a deposit of 
bonds with the State Auditor. The same principle had pre- 
viously been in operation in other States, and has now for many 
years prevailed with regard to our national bank currency. 

I may mention here that he was one of three commission- 
ers appointed by the Legislature, — Dr. Palfrey and Solomon 
Lincoln being the others, — to report the names of two dis- 
tinguished citizens whose statues should represent the State 
at Washington. The committee agreed on John Winthrop 
for the colonial period, but were divided between Samuel 
Adams and John Adams for the provincial period. Mr, Froth- 
ingham's minority report for Samuel Adams was accepted. 

During the time he was Mayor of the city of Charles- 
town the Corcoran riot occurred; and many will remember 


that to his promptness in calling out the local companies of 
State militia, the Catholic Church was probably saved from 

In the spring of 1852 Louis Kossuth, the eloquent Hun- 
garian patriot and exile, visited New England. The citizens 
of Charlestown invited him to Bunker Hill, where, on the 3d 
of May, a large and enthusiastic concourse of persons received 
him. The route of the procession was so planned as to afford 
him an opportunity to see the most interesting localities on 
the way to Breed's Hill, where on the west side of the monu- 
ment an immense platform was erected. At twelve o'clock 
Mayor Frothingham addressed Kossuth as follows : — 

" Governor Kossuth, — In behalf of the citizens of Charlestown, I 
bid you a cordial welcome to this memorable place. We stand on 
America's classic ground. The waters that flow beneath us, and every 
hill-top and valley that spread out in a beautiful amphitheatre around 
us, have their story of the men who perilled and suffered for the cause 
of freedom. Here was fought the first great battle of the War of the 
Revolution; there [pointing to Cambridge], near the shades of our 
venerable Harvard, Washington stood when he first drew his sword in 
that great struggle ; on yonder summit [pointing to Prospect Hill] . . . 
the Union flag of the thirteen stripes was first unfurled to the battle and 
the breeze ; and it was over our proud metropolis that this flag for the 
first time waved in triumph behind a retreating foe. 

" Welcome, great patriot, to these enkindling associations ! Your 
noble nature, your fidelity to principle, your labors, triumphs, perils, and 
sufferings in your country, and your continued and untiring devotion, 
in exile, to the cause of your fatherland, proclaim you to be of kindred 
spirit with the immortal men whose heroism, in a day of baptism of fire 
and blood, hallowed this soil forever to the lovers of liberty ! Welcome 
illustrious exile, to the sacred inspiration, to the awakening power, of 
this consecrated spot." 

To this address of the Mayor, of which only a portion is here 
given, Kossuth replied in a speech of considerable length. 1 

Mr. Frothingham resigned the office of Treasurer of this 
Society at the annual meeting in April, 1877, after a service, 
as I have already said, of thirty years. The contrast between 
the financial condition of the Society in 1847, when he took 
the office, and at the time when he left it, was marked. The 
Society then had no funds from which they could draw an 

1 See Kossuth in New England, pp. 125-136. Boston, 1852. 


income, their principal receipts being from annual fees of three 
dollars a year, from sixty members, and admission fees of eight 
dollars. A reference to his last account, as rendered, will 
show the Society's improved condition. Mr. Frothingham 
was a model treasurer, careful, exact, and conservative ; and 
resolutions testifying to his faithful service were adopted on 
his resignation. He had a strong attachment to the Society. 
All its members may be said to have been his personal friends, 
and he still continued to be a constant attendant at its meet- 
ings. His interest never flagged. 

In February, 1879, he took a severe cold, which, two days 
afterward, his physician pronounced to be pneumonia. It 
soon assumed a serious form. He rallied only to linger, and 
was never himself again. He occasionally mounted the iron 
staircase to these rooms, — for his heart was here, — and some- 
times he quietly visited other accustomed haunts; but a chronic 
disease of the brain slowly wore him away. At last, " with 
very little suffering, and really with many days of quiet rest 
and comfort, his strength gradually failed until he died, Jan. 
29, 1880." When his death was announced, the feeling in 
Charlestown was well-nigh universal, that the community had 
lost its first citizen. 

At the meeting of the Historical Society in the following 
Februar}r, the President announced the decease of their late 
Treasurer, with warm words of tribute, and with appropriate 
resolutions from the Standing Committee. He was followed 
by several members of the Society, including Mr. Charles C. 
Smith and Mr. Charles Francis Adams, Jr. 1 

All who knew Mr. Frothingham could testify to the pu- 
rity and worth of his private character. Says Mr. Winthrop : 
" Honest as the day, amiable, modest, public-spirited, and 
patriotic, his memory will be cherished by all who knew him, 
as we did, with unfeigned respect and affection." Courteous 
and simple in his manners, the purity of his motives and the 
benevolence of his heart gave a tone to all his conduct. He 
was a man to be loved, and had not an enemy in the world. 
He was practically a public man, a man of affairs, with a 
wide acquaintance with men. He loved to recall in later years 
his recollections of the distinguished people he had casually 
met, as of those with whom he was on terms of acquaintance 

1 Proceedings, vol. xvii. pp. 329-336. 


and intimacy. He never forgot that when a boy he twice 
shook hands with Lafayette ; and while in more recent years 
he met and conversed with the Prince of Wales and Dom 
Pedro, he had a sort of grim satisfaction in admitting that he 
once entertained Jefferson Davis and William L. Yancey. He 
more than* once told me of the interest which Mr. Webster had 
taken in his historical investigations, particularly those in 
which he had pointed out how general had been the action of 
towns and primary assemblies in authorizing or confirming the 
doings of their representatives in the revolutionary and organic 
periods of our history. 

Living under the shadow of Bunker Hill, he was naturally 
looked to by visitors as the interpreter of the battle which 
its monument commemorates. No one imparted information 
more cheerfully than himself, or more graciously dispensed 
the elegant hospitalities of his charming home in Monument 
Square, where, on anniversary or other public clays, a welcome 
hand was extended to the stranger as well as to the friend. 

In his twenty-second year, on the 18th of December, 1833, 
Mr. Frothingham was married to Vrylena, daughter of Deacon 
Isaac Blanchard, of Charlestown. A pleasant recognition of 
her sympathy with, and her interest in, his historical studies, 
is shown, forty years afterward, in an inscription following the 
titlepage of his "Rise of the Republic," "To my wife I dedi- 
cate this work." Three years after his death, as a tribute 
" to his memory, and to aid the Society in extending its honor- 
able work," she gave this Society three thousand dollars and 
the stereotype plates of her late husband's historical works, 
by means of which the "Richard Frothingham Fund" 1 was 
created, and will forever stand as a memorial of her generosity 
and her devotion to the memory of her husband. 

Funeral services were held in the Universalist Church on 
the 2d of February, conducted by his pastor, the Rev. 
Charles Follen Lee, whose simple, touching, and impressive 
words of tribute went to the heart. As pall-bearers the Massa- 
chusetts Historical Society was represented by the Hon. Robert 
C. Winthrop and the Hon. Charles Francis Adams ; the Bun- 
ker Hill Monument Association, by the Hon. Frederic W. 
Lincoln and Abbott Lawrence, Esq. ; the Board of Trustees 
of Tufts College, by President Capen and the Rev. Dr. A. A. 

1 See the Proceedings, vol. xx. pp. 174, 175. 


Miner; the Standing Committee of the Parish, by the Hon. 
Timothy T. Sawyer and the Hon. Edward Lawrence. He 
was laid in the family lot at Mount Auburn. 

His wife and five children survive him, — one son, Thomas 
Goddard Frothingham, and four daughters. 

The following works by him have been published : — 

Address at the Dedication of the Warren Schoolhouse, Charlestown, 1840. 

Oration delivered in Newbury port, July 4, 1851. 

Mayor's Address. Charlestown, 1851. 

Mayor's Address. Charlestown, 1852. 

Mayor's Address. Charlestown, 1853. 

History of Charlestown. Boston, 1845. 

Siege of Boston. Boston, 1849. Four editions were published. 

Command at Bunker Hill: Reply to S. Swett. Boston, 1850. 

Phineas Pratt's Declaration. Reprinted from 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll. 

vol. iv. 1858. 
Tribute to Thomas Starr King. Boston, 1865. 
Life and Times of Joseph Warren. Boston, 1865. 
The Rise of the Republic of the United States. Boston, 1872.- 
Address at Dedication of Soldiers' and Sailors' Monument, Charlestown, 

Oration delivered in Boston, July 4, 1874. 
The Centennial: Battle of Bunker Hill. Boston, 1875. 
The Battle of Bunker Hill, with William Prescott's Narrative. From the 

Proceedings for June, 1875, vol. xiv. pp. 52-102. 
Illustrations of the Siege of Boston, etc. Reprinted from the Proceedings 

of the Massachusetts Historical Society for March, 1876, vol. xiv. pp'. 

The Alarm on the Night of April 18, 1775. 1876. 
Notice of the Hon. Josiah Bartlett, M.D. From the Proceedings, vol. i. 

pp. 323-330. 

No attempt has been made to make a list of the papers and 
addresses of Mr. Frothingham, not separately published ; but 
mention may be made of a " Sketch of the History of Charles- 
town/' in Hayward's " New England Gazetteer," 1857. 






The distinguished archaeologist and historian whose name is 
placed at the head of this notice, and who was for more than 
forty years Librarian of the American Antiquarian Society, 
died on the 5th of September, 1881. Commemorative trib- 
utes to his character and genius and to his eminent services 
were paid by associations and individuals with whom he had 
for many years been intimately connected. Special mention 
may be made of those by the Hon. Stephen Salisbury and 
Colonel John D. Washburn, at a meeting of the Council of 
the American Antiquarian Society, held on the day following 
Mr. Haven's death ; and of those of the Rev. Edward E. Hale, 
D.D., in his report of the Council of that Society in October, 
followed by brief remarks of Mr. Barton, the Librarian, and 
of Mr. Paine, the Treasurer. Tributes of Mr. Winthrop and 
of Dr. Ellis, the President and Vice-President of the Massa- 
chusetts Historical Society, at the meetings in September and 
October of that year, are duly recorded in that Society's Pro- 
ceedings. The more elaborate tributes of Dr. Hale and of 
Colonel Washburn, above referred to, are admirable as an 
analysis of Mr. Haven's fine qualities of mind and as a char- 
acterization of the man. Nothing better could be desired. 

All these remarks, with resolutions adopted by several soci- 
eties, were, by direction of Mrs. Haven, printed in a pamphlet 
as a " Memorial " for distribution. 

In the brief sketch which I shall here give, I propose to my- 
self the humbler service of describing Mr. Haven principally 
through his work. 


Samuel Foster Haven was the son of Samuel and Elizabeth 
(Foster) Haven, and was born in Dedham, Massachusetts, May 
28, 1806. He was descended from Richard Haven, of Lynn. 
He was prepared for college at Phillips Academy, Andover, 
Massachusetts, and Phillips Academy, Exeter, New Hampshire; 
and he entered Harvard College in 1822, where he spent two 
years. He then entered Amherst College, from which he 
graduated in 1826. After leaving college he began the study 
of the law, one year being spent in the office of the Hon. 
Theron Metcalf in Dedham, and one year in the Harvard Law 
School. He was admitted to the. bar in September, 1829, and 
passed one year in the practice of his profession in Dedham, 
and three years in Lowell, where he continued two years longer 
as secretary of an insurance company. Returning to Dedham 
in the fall of 1835, he remained there till April, 1838, when he 
took up his residence in Worcester, Massachusetts, having been 
previously (Sept. 23, 1837) chosen Librarian of the American 
Antiquarian Society. In this position he continued till failing 
health compelled his resignation from active duties, in April, 
1881. 1 

Mr. Haven's historical and. archaeological writings were 
principally prepared in connection with his duties as Librarian, 
and published in the Antiquarian Society's volumes. He had 
a natural taste for history, and was a polished writer. On the 
21st of September, L836, a year before he was chosen Libra- 
rian, he delivered a centennial address at Dedham, which 
was published in the following year, and entitled " An His- 
torical Address delivered before the Citizens of the Town of 
Dedham, being the Second Centennial Anniversary of the 
Incorporation of the Town." Entering upon his duties as 
Librarian in April, 1838, he found congenial work. His first 
printed report is contained in a pamphlet published in 1839, 
entitled " Fifty-third Semi-annual Report of the Council of 
the American Antiquarian Society, May 29, 1839, with the 
Report of the Librarian." This report of the Librarian is his 
semi-annual report from October, 1838, to May, 1839, inclusive. 
The pamphlet also included abstracts of the reports submitted 
at the annual meeting in October, 1839. A glance at these 

1 A brief summary of Mr. Haven's life in an " Obituary Record of Graduates 
of Amherst College for the Academic Year ending June 28, 1882," published at 
Andover, has furnished me with some data for this sketch. 


reports by Mr. Haven shows that he fully realized the impor- 
tance of the work he had entered upon, and that he was 
maturing his plans for classifying the large mass of historical 
material which came under his hands. In the report for May, 
1839, he says : — 

"The duty of arranging the Library according to a scientific method, 
required of the Librarian by the by-laws, has been the subject of much 
consideration. Efforts have been made to ascertain what systems have 
been adopted in other libraries, and to learn the views of persons having 
the advantage of experience. The result is a conviction that only a 
very general arrangement of books upon the shelves with reference to 
subjects* is practicable or expedient, and that the classification in the 
Librarian's Catalogue should be simple and comprehensive. It is often 
less difficult to find a book under a general head than to trace it through 
minute subdivisions, where a difference of opinion may exist as to the 
propriety of its position. An exemplification of the arrangement pro- 
posed by the Librarian for his book of entries, accompanies this report. 
It will be perceived that, being based upon the great objects of the 
Society, namely, to ascertain the past, preserve the present, and keep 
pace with the progressive history of America, the titles of the classes 
have relation to that design, the minuter subdivision being that of dates 
or periods of time. Foreign works and others not affecting our history 
must of course be placed under heads appropriate to themselves." 

The next published reports were of the two meetings in 
1843, issued separately ; but they were mere abstracts, with 
a list of the books given. Seven years later, in 1850, we have 
in print the Proceedings for the October meeting, 1849 ; and 
from that time to the present the Proceedings of all the meet- 
ings have been regularly issued. This circumstance, together 
with the increase of members and the added interest in the 
objects of the Society, gave Mr. Haven freer scope in the 
preparation and publication of his reports, in which he began 
to embody those delightful disquisitions on historical themes 
which for so many years gave a charm to the meetings of the 
Society. He occasionally wrote the reports of the Council, 
which are signed with his name. 

It was now many years since the Society had published a 
volume of its Transactions, known as " Archseologia Ameri- 
cana." This was Volume II,, issued in 183G ; but the Society 
had for some time contemplated an important work. At the 
October meeting in 1845, it was announced that arrangements 


were in progress for the publication of a new volume of 
"Arehieologia," to be made up in part of the earliest records 
of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, containing matters of 
great interest which had never yet been printed, beginning 
with the formation of the company in England, and coming 
down to about the year 1640. These records were exposed to 
great peril; and as the State had not seen fit to direct their 
publication, it was hoped that the legislature might be dis- 
posed to aid the efforts of the Antiquarian Society in securing 
their publication. 

In entering upon this work, the Council, at the meeting in 
October, 1849, suggested that it was an undertaking of the 
Society in a new direction, " indicating a chajige in the sphere 
of its operations, which may possibly become more marked 

Mr. Haven undertook the editorship of the volume. The 
transcript was made by Mr. David Pulsifer, and the care and 
labor of collation were shared with him by the Rev. J. B. Felt, 
one of the Committee of Publication. The volume, or part of 
a volume, being Part I. of Vol. III. of " Transactions," the text 
of which consisted of about one hundred pages, was announced 
at the October meeting in 1850 as having been published. It 
comprised only the Massachusetts Company's Records from 
the beginning down to the embarkation of Winthrop at 
Southampton, March 23, 16ff. To this Mr. Haven had 
prefixed -a treatise on the " Origin of the Company," con- 
sisting of one hundred and thirty-eight pages. This, with 
numerous notes to the text, embraced a mass of information 
about the Company and its members which had never before 
been brought together, and all students of New England 
history were grateful to him for his labors. Dr. Palfrey says 
concerning this treatise : " To no one am I indebted for more 
light than to that eminent archaeologist, Mr. Samuel F. Haven, 
of Worcester, ... in elaborating the view presented in these 
pages of the origin and purposes of the Company of the Massa- 
chusetts Bay." 

This portion of the Records of the Massachusetts Colony 
was all that the Antiquarian Society ever published ; for on 
the 2d of May, 1853, the legislature authorized the printing 
of the first two volumes of the Records, under the supervision 
of Dr. N. B. Shurtleff ; and the unused part of Mr. Pulsifer's 


transcript was passed over to the State, and Vol. ITT. of the 
Society's Transactions was completed by the publication in 
1857 of " Hull's Diary," edited by Mr. Hale. 

In December of that year, 1850, Mr. Haven and Mr. James 
Savage had a discussion in the " Boston Daily Advertiser " on 
the question as to the number of persons who came over with 
Endicott, and as to whether more than one ship transported 
them. The first article, contributed by Mr. Haven, headed 
" Did Endicott and his Company embark in a Single Ship? " 
was called out by an adverse criticism, in the November number 
of the " Christian Examiner," on his recently published notes. 
Mr. Savage replied in an article headed " Captain Endicott 
and his Companions came in a Single Ship," and signed " Ve- 
ridicus." Mr. Haven rejoined, and Mr. Savage had the last 
word. A few years ago Mr. Haven had these papers reprinted 
in a pamphlet, with an unpublished concluding number by 
himself, — No. V.,. which the editor of the "Advertiser," 
unwilling to prolong the controversy, had declined to publish, 
— and entitled it "-A Brief Passage at Arms in relation to a 
Small Point of History," — one hundred copies of which were 

Mr. Haven's duties as Librarian were considerably increased 
about this time by the necessity of providing enlarged accom- 
modations for the Society. A new building was erected, and 
in 1853 was completed ; and the treasures of the Library and 
Cabinet were transferred to the present depository, and the 
annual meeting for October was held in its beautiful new hall. 
In his report at this meeting he speaks of the obvious necessity 
for the present, in placing the books upon their shelves, to 
preserve as far as possible their former arrangement, in order 
to retain the benefit of the numerical references in the cata- 
logue. This was wise, as any other plan would have been 
attended with increased labor, and he had enough to do 

There was a growing interest in the history of the European 
race in this country ; and as materials for that history were 
rapidly accumulating under his eye, it required time and 
labor to render them available for use. But Mr. Haven 
never lost his love for the purely archaeological themes to 
which the Society was early devoted ; and in 1855 he furnished, 
as one of the " Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge," a 


volume, of one hundred and sixty-eight pages in folio, on the 
44 Archeology of the United States," giving a'history of inves- 
tigations and their results down to the time he wrote. And 
in the discussion of historical matters in his semi-annual reports 
for the next twenty-five years, it will be noticed that, inter- 
spersed among the discussions of topics more nearly related 
to our own times, such subjects as American Archaeology and 
Exploration, Mexican Antiquities, Mound Builders, Dighton 
Rock, the Prehistoric Period in the Old World, Lake Dwell- 
ings, the Stone Age, Flint Implements, etc., often employed 
his pen. 

In 1860 the Antiquarian Society published a new volume of 
44 Transactions," — Vol. IV. Mr. Haven, Mr. Hale, and my- 
self had for some years constituted the Publishing Committee 
of the Society, and now we each contributed a paper to this 
new volume. Mr. Haven's contribution was a 44 Narrative of 
a Voyage to Spitzbergen in the Year 1613," from a contempo- 
rary manuscript, with introduction and notes. He had some 
copies separately issued for private distribution. 

Never of a robust constitution, his health was often feeble. 
He was a solitary man. Losing the wife of his youth a few 
years after their marriage, 1 his only domestic solace was the 
care of their only son, bearing his name, who, as he grew up to 
manhood, fulfilled every promise and hope that had been cher- 
ished of him. He graduated at Harvard College in 1852, 
and at the Boston Medical College in 1855, continued his 
studies in London, Paris, Vienna, and Berlin, and settled in 
Worcester. When the War of the Rebellion broke out, he 
offered his services, and joined the Fifteenth Massachusetts 
Regiment as assistant surgeon. He was regardless of per- 
sonal exposure, and always accompanied his regiment into 
battle. At the engagement at Fredericksburg he was killed 
by a shell, while marching by the side of the color-bearer, 
Dec. 13, 1862. 2 

This was a well-nigh crushing blow to his father, already 
suffering from infirm health; but his library work went on. 
In the report of the Council at the next meeting of the Anti- 

1 It is stated, at the conclusion of this notice, that on Dec. 3, 1872, thirty-six 
years afte